Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply Warrior Monks Guild
The Monk's Debate Corner ((OOC))

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

L337onimusha

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 12:35 am


Hiya. The purpose of this here thread is to facilitate intellectual debate and, more importantly, personal growth. We'll discuss things like philosophy, religion, and polotics, but really whatever comes up is fine. I feel a bit obligated to lay down some ground rules, so here I go:

1. No angst.
2. Be respectful of other people's viewpoints.
3. No evangelizing.
4. When someone says something, take it for what it is. Do Not become defensive.
5. Don't be shy. If everyone is mature about this, your comments won't hurt anybody's feelings, so feel free to say what you want to.
And the biggest one of all.... 6. Be an open-minded, critically-thinking Monk.
I guess this one is kinda big too... 7. Have fun!
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 5:47 am


Let's kick off then! biggrin ( I'm not really good in ventilating an opinion, though I should... blaugh )

Source: Doctorswithoutborders.org

After 24 Years of Independent Aid to the Afghan People Doctors Without Borders Withdraws from Afghanistan Following Killings, Threats, and Insecurity

At a press conference in Kabul, Kenny Gluck, MSF Director of Operations and Marine Buissonnière, Secretary General of MSF announced MSF's closure of all programs in Afghanistan.
Kabul, 28 July 2004 – With a deep feeling of sadness and anger, the international medical humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) announces today the closure of all medical programs in Afghanistan. MSF is taking this decision in the aftermath of the killing of five MSF aid workers in a deliberate attack on June 2, 2004, when a clearly marked MSF vehicle was ambushed in the northwestern province of Badghis. Five of our colleagues were mercilessly shot in the attack. This targeted killing of five of its aid workers is unprecedented in the history of MSF, which has been delivering medical humanitarian assistance in some of the most violent conflicts around the world over the last 30 years.

Although government officials have presented MSF with credible evidence that local commanders conducted the attack, they have neither detained nor publicly called for their arrest. The lack of government response to the killings represents a failure of responsibility and an inadequate commitment to the safety of aid workers on its soil.

In addition, following the assassinations, a Taliban spokesperson claimed responsibility for the murders and stated later that organizations like MSF work for American interests, are therefore targets, and would be at risk of further attacks. This false accusation is particularly unjustified as MSF honors the separation of aid from political motives as a founding principle. The sole aim of the organization is to provide assistance to populations in distress in the name of medical ethics and solely based on their needs. This threat undeniably constitutes a refusal by the Taliban to accept independent and impartial humanitarian action.

Over the last 24 years, MSF has continued to provide health care throughout difficult periods of Afghanistan’s history, regardless of the political party or military group in power. "After having worked nearly without interruption alongside the most vulnerable Afghan people since 1980, it is with outrage and bitterness that we take the decision to abandon them. But we simply cannot sacrifice the security of our volunteers while warring parties seek to target and kill humanitarian workers. Ultimately it is the sick and destitute that suffer," said Marine Buissonnière, Secretary General of MSF.

The violence directed against humanitarian aid workers has come in a context in which the United States-backed coalition has consistently sought to use humanitarian aid to build support for its military and political ambitions. MSF denounces the coalition’s attempts to co-opt humanitarian aid and use it to "win hearts and minds." By doing so, providing aid is no longer seen as an impartial and neutral act, endangering the lives of humanitarian volunteers and jeopardizing the aid to people in need. Only recently, on May 12, 2004, MSF publicly condemned the distribution of leaflets by the coalition forces in southern Afghanistan in which the population was informed that providing information about the Taliban and al Qaeda was necessary if they wanted the delivery of aid to continue.

Humanitarian assistance is only possible when armed actors respect the safety of humanitarian workers, more than 30 of whom have been killed in Afghanistan since the beginning of 2003. The killing of our colleagues, the government’s failure to arrest the culprits, and the false allegations by the Taliban have regrettably made it impossible for MSF to continue providing assistance to the Afghan people.

Until the assassinations, MSF provided health care in 13 provinces with 80 international volunteers and 1,400 Afghan staff. Our projects included the provision of basic and hospital level health care as well as tuberculosis treatment and programs to reduce maternal mortality. In the coming weeks, MSF will complete the hand over of its programs to the Ministry of Health and other organizations. As MSF leaves Afghanistan, we mourn the loss of our five colleagues. At the same time MSF takes this decision with great sadness for the people we will fail to assist.

( This news makes me wonder; Did America do Afghanistan any good by invading them? It seems like the situation there is worse than ever, so bad that large scaled humanitarian organisations like MSF flee the country. Too make matters worse; instead of solving the mess they made in Afghanistan, they simply invaded another country...How can a government be so ignorant and stupid!

RyuDarkwood


Atsu
Captain

PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 8:53 am


RyuDarkwood
How can a government be so ignorant and stupid!


Some would say that is what government is for... sweatdrop
PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:18 am


Atsu
RyuDarkwood
How can a government be so ignorant and stupid!


Some would say that is what government is for... sweatdrop


"If all people were angels, we wouldn't need government"



.....but the government is run by people.....who are not all angels. stare

Kura X
Vice Captain


L337onimusha

PostPosted: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:31 pm


I can't find the article, but apparently FBI seized a gentleman's computer, server, everything using he patriot act. Apparently he was running one of the largest Fan Sites for Stargate SG-1. FBI Used the patriot act as a cover and took his stuff for over six months. YAY Patriot act!
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 8:14 am


That is crazy. Why is SG1 against the patriot act?

Ianthe Halvard


RyuDarkwood

PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 8:17 am


Darth Spork
That is crazy. Why is SG1 against the patriot act?


I heard a similair story about someone's X-box live-account. In that case, they were searching for hidden messages from terrorists or something.
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 8:41 am


RyuDarkwood


I heard a similair story about someone's X-box live-account. In that case, they were searching for hidden messages from terrorists or something.


You have got to be kidding.

Atsu
Captain


RyuDarkwood

PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:29 am


The article is outdated, but it's the only one I could find concerning this subject. I underlined the part about X-box live.

FBI adds to wiretap wish list
Last modified: March 12, 2004, 1:05 PM PST
By Declan McCullagh and Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com


A far-reaching proposal from the FBI, made public Friday, would require all broadband Internet providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire their networks to support easy wiretapping by police.


News.context

What's new:
A far-reaching FBI proposal would require all broadband Net providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire their networks to support easy wiretapping by police.
Bottom line:
If approved as drafted, the proposal could dramatically expand the scope of the agency's wiretap powers, raise costs for cable broadband companies and complicate Internet product development.

More stories on this topic
The FBI's request to the Federal Communications Commission aims to give police ready access to any form of Internet-based communications. If approved as drafted, the proposal could dramatically expand the scope of the agency's wiretap powers, raise costs for cable broadband companies and complicate Internet product development.

Legal experts said the 85-page filing includes language that could be interpreted as forcing companies to build back doors into everything from instant messaging and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) programs to Microsoft's Xbox Live game service. The introduction of new services that did not support a back door for police would be outlawed, and companies would be given 15 months to make sure that existing services comply.

"The importance and the urgency of this task cannot be overstated," says the proposal, which is also backed by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration. "The ability of federal, state and local law enforcement to carry out critical electronic surveillance is being compromised today."

Because the eavesdropping scheme has the support of the Bush administration, the FCC is expected to take it very seriously. Last month, FCC Chairman Michael Powell stressed that "law enforcement access to IP-enabled communications is essential" and that police must have "access to communications infrastructure they need to protect our nation."

The request from federal police comes almost a year after representatives from the FBI's Electronic Surveillance Technology Section approached the FCC and asked that broadband providers be required to provide more efficient, standardized surveillance facilities. Such new rules were necessary, the FBI argued, because terrorists could otherwise frustrate legitimate wiretaps by placing phone calls over the Internet.

"It is a very big deal and will be very costly for the Internet and the deployment of new technologies," said Stewart Baker, who represents Internet providers as a partner at law firm Steptoe & Johnson. "Law enforcement is very serious about it. There is a lot of emotion behind this. They have stories that they're very convinced about in which they have not achieved access to communications and in which wiretaps have failed."

Broadband in the mix
Broadband providers say the FBI's request would, for the first time, force cable providers that sell broadband to come under the jurisdiction of 1994's Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which further defined the already existing statutory obligations of telecommunications carriers to help police conduct electronic surveillance. Telephone companies that use their networks to sell broadband have already been following CALEA rules.

"For cable companies, it's all new," said Bill McCloskey, a BellSouth spokesman.

Several cable providers, including Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cablevision Systems, had no immediate comment on the FBI's request.

The FBI proposal would also force Vonage, 8x8, AT&T and other prominent providers of broadband telephone services to comply with CALEA. Executives from these companies have said in the past that they all intend to comply with any request law enforcement makes, if technically possible.

Broadband phone service providers say they are already creating a code of conduct to cover some of the same issues the FBI is addressing--but on a voluntary basis, according to Jeff Pulver, founder of Free World Dialup. "We have our chance right now to prove to law enforcement that we can do this on a voluntary basis," Pulver said. "If we mandate and make rules, it will just complicate things."

Under CALEA, police must still follow legal procedures when wiretapping Internet communications. Depending on the situation, such wiretaps do not always require court approval, in part because of expanded wiretapping powers put in place by the USA Patriot Act.

A Verizon representative said Friday that the company has already complied with at least one law enforcement request to tap a DSL line.

This week's proposal surprised privacy advocates by reaching beyond broadband providers to target companies that offer communications applications such as instant-messaging clients.

"I don't think it's a reasonable claim," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The FCC should seriously consider where the FBI believes its authority...to regulate new technologies would end. What about Bluetooth and USB?"

Baker agrees that the FBI's proposal means that IP-based services such as chat programs and videoconferencing "that are 'switched' in any fashion would be treated as telephony." If the FCC agrees, Baker said, "you would have to vet your designs with law enforcement before providing your service. There will be a queue. There will be politics involved. It would completely change the way services are introduced on the Internet."

As encryption becomes glued into more and more VoIP and instant-messaging systems like PSST, X-IM and CryptIM, eavesdropping methods like the FBI's Carnivore system (also called DCS1000) become less useful. Both Free World Dialup's Pulver, and Niklas Zennstrom, founder of Skype, said last month that their services currently offer no easy wiretap route for police, because VoIP calls travel along the Internet in tens of thousands of packets, each sometimes taking completely different routes.

Skype has become a hot button in the debate by automatically encrypting all calls that take place through the peer-to-peer voice application.

The origins of this debate date back to when the FBI persuaded Congress to enact the controversial CALEA. Louis Freeh, FBI director at the time, testified in 1994 that emerging technologies such as call forwarding, call waiting and cellular phones had frustrated surveillance efforts.

Congress responded to the FBI's concern by requiring that telecommunications services rewire their networks to provide police with guaranteed access for wiretaps. Legislators also granted the FCC substantial leeway in defining what types of companies must comply. So far, the FCC has interpreted CALEA's wiretap-ready requirements to cover only traditional analog and wireless telephone service, leaving broadband and Internet applications in a regulatory gray area.

Under the FBI's proposal, Internet companies would bear "sole financial responsibility for development and implementation of CALEA solutions" but would be authorized to raise prices to cover their costs.
PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2004 11:08 am


Don't people involved in polotics ever read classic literature?! I never do this, so excuse me, but OMFG!!! Honestly. Just pick up a copy of Anthem, or 1984, ar even Brave New World. Geez...

L337onimusha


L337onimusha

PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 9:21 pm


This has nothing o do with anything, but: w00t!!! Today was my last day at work! Ahhhhh.... It's good to be free...
PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:37 am


Brave new World was an interesting book. I still need to read 1984 though.

Atsu
Captain


L337onimusha

PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 11:41 am


All right. I'm gonna throw out a question in hopes of getting some debate going here:

What is the purpose of religion? Why do we, an intellectually advanced race, keep falling back on religion instead of faith? Is there a difference between the two?

Please, beat his subject to death.
Reply
Warrior Monks Guild

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum