Letter Casts Doubt On Yahoo China Testimony

Saint Aardvark writes "A hand-written letter has surfaced that sheds new light on the case of Chinese reporter Shi Tao. The letter (PDF), believed to be from Chinese police, 'is essentially a standardized search warrant making clear that Chinese law enforcement agencies have the legal authority to collect evidence in criminal cases. This contradicts Yahoo's testimony (PDF) to Congress in 2006 that they 'had no information about the nature of the investigation.' 'One does not have to be an expert in Chinese law to know that 'state secrets' charges have often been used to punish political dissent in China,' says Joshua Rosenzweig, manager of research and publications for The Dui Hua Foundation. Shi Tao was sentenced to 10 years in prison for his reporting on the Tianamen Square massacre."

So What?

[MightyMartian]

Why, we were just following orders? You don't expect us to break the laws of other nations, do you? Don't worry, by helping Chinese officials silence those Chinese citizens brave enough to criticize their regime, we are in fact bringing freedom to China!

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

Re:So What?

[Cassius Corodes]

This kind of behaviour is on the increase around the world - the Internet is not the bastion of anonymity it once was - and we have mostly western companies to blame.

Food for thought.

[Token_Internet_Girl]

Normally I'd have something terrible to say, but in this case I think I'd say this: As much as we hate hearing about Paris Hilton 234987129371 times, Freedom of the Press is important, even though Fox abuses it incessantly.

Re:So What?

[EMeta]

Following orders is one thing. Lying to congress is a considerable felony. Why does no one seem to get this these days, lying to congress is not some American right, no matter how much they lie to you?

Companies? Or governments?

[Opportunist]

Let's see. After all, it looks like Yahoo lied to congress, if I interpret this correctly. There was an investigation from congress, and they said it ain't so. In my books, this constitutes as a lie.

Now the congress is in a considerable problem. Either they fine a company or they accept that companies lie to them freely. Decisions, decisions...

I have a gut feeling I know how this will end.

Re:So What?

[Creepy Crawler]

Guess what: It never was.

For a long time, it appeared to be anonymous. However, do you think you were anon to groups like Doubleclick, or Yahoo, or any other aggregate "news" or ad portal?

There were ways to be anon:

1: Use a Socks proxy
2: Use a "web only" proxy (mal-configured Squid is your friend)
3: Use a mail-WWW translator machine (with appropriate obfuscations in the mail client)

Now, we can use the net anon via TOR, or nyud.net for not hitting their machine, or a multitude of new options.

Re:So What?

[Opportunist]

Well, whether they want to or not, politicians are some kind of role model. If people think their politicians care for their country and put the country before anything else, they will do the same. If people think politicians are crooks that care about the country if it coincidentally happens to be done by the same procedures that line their pockets, people will do the same.

They're representatives in the truest sense of the word.

Re:The state secrets he leaked

[Opportunist]

Well, if the world uses Chinese Google [google.cn], it just might not...

Not contradictory

[StikyPad]

They testified that they had no knowledge of the details surrounding the case. The "warrant" simply states that the Chinese government is asserting its right to obtain the IP address and content of the e-mails. No details are provided other than the justification.

For some reason, there's 3 pages of posts modded up for berating Yahoo's supposed perjury before Congress, but, as usual, nobody bothered to read the fucking anything.