Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Social Networks The Internet The Media News Technology

In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail, Cost You Your Life 144

Posted by Soulskill
from the blog-free-or-die dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Bloggers in Vietnam are increasingly finding themselves thrown in jail. Despite freedom of speech being enshrined in the nation's Constitution, many who speak out against the government are thrown in jail — thanks to a new law that forbids such talk. In one desperate act, Dang Thi Kim Lieng lit herself on fire outside the Bac Lieu People's Committee building in southern Vietnam. She died of her injuries. She was protesting the detention of her daughter who was arrested for blogging against the government. Three other bloggers are scheduled be tried under section 88 of the criminal code, which relates to propaganda against the nation. A maximum sentence could carry with it 20 years in jail."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail, Cost You Your Life

Comments Filter:
  • by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @05:54PM (#40990211) Journal

    We're not just talking about Assange. We're talking about thousands of Americans who took to the streets last year to exercise their constitutional right to peaceably assemble. Over 7000 [moonfruit.com] people have been arrested as part of OWS, including Presidential candidate Jill Stein [huffingtonpost.com].

  • Misleading Title (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dean Edmonds (189342) on Tuesday August 14, 2012 @06:06PM (#40990361)

    The title of this article claims that being a blogger in Vietnam could cost you your life. But the only person to lose their life was a non-blogger who set herself on fire in protest at the new law. So a more accurate title would be, "In Vietnam: Being a Blogger Could Land You In Jail. Setting Yourself On Fire Could Cost You Your Life".

  • by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday August 15, 2012 @01:45AM (#40993763) Journal

    Uhhh...the US government covered up for a PMC that was SELLING LITTLE KIDS to get better arms deals. Oh and that was the SECOND TIME they had been caught pulling that shit, the first was in Kosovo.

    I'm sorry but your right to get on a high horse dies when you cover up for child rapists, the end.

  • by jkflying (2190798) on Wednesday August 15, 2012 @01:46AM (#40993769)

    He isn't inside the US, and isn't a citizen of the US, therefore he can't be a traitor for releasing documents on the US, even if the US wanted them kept secret.

    Yes, they probably should have asked the datacenter to disconnect him, however even if they had agreed, as the datacenter probably had a contract with Wikileaks, the local court could have ordered them to resume service. That's what happens when another country makes demands somewhere they don't have any sovereignty, people don't tend to listen. How would you feel if Spain suddenly decided that the website you are hosting says things that they would rather keep secret, so they threaten to send missiles in if you won't remove the site? You'd probably laugh them off. Well, Europe feels much the same about the US.

    Following a refusal with missiles probably would have caused several embargos on the US from around the world. Certainly from Europe, South America, and Australia. I suspect a lot of countries would start refusing entry for US tourists, and the resultant backlash from the US population on whoever ordered the attacks would be enormous. Mostly, however, it would make Assange a martyr, which is the last thing the US wants. Right now he is a loner with sex scandal charges hanging over him. Take him out, and thousands will rise up in his place.

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.

Working...