Australian Deported From Bahrain Over Facebook Posts 188
An anonymous reader writes "Australian English instructor Tony Mitchell recently moved to Bahrain where he was offered a job at the state-run Polytechnic University. He described himself as a witness of the various horrifying events in the struggling country (see The Atlantic's four-part series). Mitchell was eventually fired, evicted, and forced to flee because of posts he made on Facebook."
When in Rome (Score:5, Insightful)
It's probably best not to write bad things about the Emperor.
Seriously, when you're in somebody elses country you need to be really mindful about what you say or do that's likely to upset the government.
Get out of fail free card. (Score:4, Insightful)
He is lucky (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd think... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are willing to go to an oppressive country. And in so doing contribute to their economy and success, then... it's just crocodile tears when you find out that that oppressive country is oppressive to you too.
Re:When in Rome (Score:4, Insightful)
on the other hand, some would say he had balls for standing up to the oppressors. he stands up for what he thinks is right, and you say "well, it's your own fault" when he gets deported? perhaps if more people stood up, not less, we wouldn't have these problems, regardless of having crossed some arbitrary boundary like a nation-state border. we're all humans, irrespective of where we are. show some backbone and stop being so subservient to power
Re:When in Rome (Score:4, Insightful)
He's not in the USA.
No; but freedom of speech is not a right which suddenly disappears when you cross the Mexican border. This is a fundamental and ancient right which nobody has the right to take away from you no matter what. This man knew that he was putting himself at risk but when he "saw the government's brutal response to a fledgling revolution, he knew he couldn't stay neutral". The point where you start to criticise him for doing that is the point where you have become supporter of the oppressor.
People who stand up for freedom need our support; they already know that they are putting themselves at risk and don't need the words of a bunch of cowards afraid of their own shadows to tell them that.
Re:When in Rome (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:When in Rome (Score:2, Insightful)
In a way this is an example of why third world countries don't improve to first world standards. Their best people leave to first world countries. As a result the third world country is run by third world leaders supported by third world voters. First world guy drops in to get a job, discovers that the place is badly run and follows emigrants from that country back to his own first world country.
So if you want to see improvement in Bahrain, don't allow immigration from that country at all, for at least a generation. People with the ability to change things will be forced to do it on their own turf.
Re:When in Rome (Score:4, Insightful)
No; but freedom of speech is not a right which suddenly disappears when you cross the Mexican border. This is a fundamental and ancient right which nobody has the right to take away from you no matter what.
Agreed, although I would go one step further to say that, while this is a fundamental right that nobody has the right to take away from you, that doesn't mean that people with power won't try, nor does it mean that you will not (possibly) suffer for attempting to exercise that right. There is a subtle distinction between "This is the way it should be" and "This is the way it is."
This man knew that he was putting himself at risk but when he "saw the government's brutal response to a fledgling revolution, he knew he couldn't stay neutral". The point where you start to criticise him for doing that is the point where you have become supporter of the oppressor.
People who stand up for freedom need our support; they already know that they are putting themselves at risk and don't need the words of a bunch of cowards afraid of their own shadows to tell them that.
Agreed, without reservations.
Re:When in Rome (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm from the US to, but that doesn't mean that I'd move to Iran and start badmouthing the Iranian authorities.
That's not the question. The question is:
You never intended to badmouth the Iranians; You wanted to support their culture and be open; but now you are faced with the bad side of it. Are you really saying it's a better person who lets the rape victim be stoned to death without a word?
Re:He is lucky (Score:5, Insightful)
For a love of.... We are talking about Bahrain, not US. It is getting old. Push your message about evil NDAA and POSA in other forums. This one already knows that.
Re:When in Rome (Score:1, Insightful)
Sorry, but when does USA law apply to Bahrain? Despite what the USA likes to believe, it had borders and its law have limits (which is a "Good Thing"(tm) considering what the USA is trying to ram down everyone's throats of late).
Re:When in Rome (Score:4, Insightful)
That is, of course, merely curtailing another fundamental human right to resettle. Beyond that, it was tried (and didn't work) for the USSR.
Re:When in Rome (Score:3, Insightful)
freedom of speech is not a right which suddenly disappears when you cross the Mexican border. This is a fundamental and ancient right
[citation needed]
Seriously - name a country that had such a right before 1776.
Re:When in Rome (Score:5, Insightful)
or in fact the whole EU
Not quite, while most speech is free here, we still criminalize some at least in part of the countries. For example in Germany, where denying the holocaust is unlawful (and in fact, such laws were first imposed by the US Army when they took control after WWII - apparently, Free Speech only counts back home).
Re:You'd think... (Score:4, Insightful)
What do you mean "we", white man? Not everyone here's from the US, you know?
Re:Hey, we do that too. Worse, really (Score:4, Insightful)
a few sad stories of injured policemen at the protests
In Lybia, the goverment says that a lot of soldiers were killed during the protests, but in fact, they were killed by other soldiers because they refused to shoot people.
Being a soldier does not automatically make you a brainless killer.
Re:When in Rome (Score:4, Insightful)
In a way this is an example of why third world countries don't improve to first world standards. Their best people leave to first world countries. As a result the third world country is run by third world leaders supported by third world voters.
Ha!
Bahrain is a third world country supported by the US of A.
The same goes for Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the UAE, and Qatar.
(I may have missed a middle eastern country or two, there are a few asian ones I didn't include)
As long as they're with us on Oil, Israel, and the Global War on Terror, we give them free reign to act like assholes to their own citizens.
Re:When in Rome (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:When in Rome (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with you that US only entered WW2 due to pearl harbour, but I'm curious, would you prefer a Russian or German Europe to what it is now? And if anything Japan showed US that it is not untouchable.
US profited big time from WW2 in various ways, I'd say that European countries (UK included) have more than paid their debt to the US by now.
What I'm trying to say is that the world of politics is a little bit more complicated than "I helped you, be grateful". There are a lot of fingers in the same pie, I'm absolutely sure than the US gets more than their fair share.
I'd also be careful what you wish for. Despite appearances, European economy is a lot larger than US Economy. US needs Europe more than Europe needs US. And we all need China and Russia more than most people realise.
So how about we all try and get along without bickering about who helped who 70 years ago. It's starting to sound almost as bad as complaining about the crusade.