Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 153 posts

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#121

Post by rasz »

space_fountain wrote: post #73
HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A man was given a suspended jail sentence in the UK for making a joke video about Grenfell. To (on the whole) great and uncritical applause from the media and general public.

Article for those who might be interest: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/20/man-admits-p... . A 10 week jail sentence for a racist video making fun of a terrible tragedy doesn't bother me as much as locking up political opponents

Does it bother you it was the ONLY jail sentence associated with this enormous disaster? You can kill 70 people, just dont say bad things about them, mkay?

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#122

Post by darkarmani »

rndgermandude wrote: post #107
mcphage wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or is that only if I leaked the secrets of a state you consider a "good guy" state? Of course. There’s a difference between good and evil, as much as you’re trying to pretend otherwise.

Have you considered that after seeing how the US handled Manning, handled Assange, handled Snowden, handled Ellsberg, handled Martin Luther King Jr, handled the Vietnam war, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, Guantanamo Bay, and the countless other shit just in the last half century, I might have a hard time putting them squarely into the "good guys" bracket? That isn't to relativize in any way what others are doing…

I'm not sure the criteria for being good is being perfect and "never making a mistake".

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#123

Post by darkarmani »

njarboe wrote: post #87
quantified wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you drive a car, fly on a plane, have trucks in your supply chain, use plastic anywhere in your life- you support that engagement. Sucks but they're built in now.

The US, due to fracking, is now a net exporter of oil most years. Hopefully with more electric cars in the fleet each year oil use will also decline dramatically. We should use that opportunity to distance ourselves from Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately I think one factor driving US engagement that is not often discussed is the tens of billions Saudi Arabia spends on US weapon systems each year, not just oil interest.

> is now a net exporter of oil most years

There are different kinds of oil and they aren't equivalent.

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#124

Post by darkarmani »

ngcc_hk wrote: post #21

Kill a man, chop into pieces and shipped away. Fine now. Jail a woman … Do you think they think it is not good from the outside world?

> Kill a man, chop into pieces and shipped away. Fine now.

What? Who said that was fine?\

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#125

Post by spacechild1 »

fein wrote: post #106
spacechild1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mr. Bond was a notorious neo-nazi rapper, calling it "political parody songs" is pretty misleading. For context: he was convicted of "Wiederbetätigung" (= glorification of national-socialism) which is a distinct criminal offence in Germany and Austria

So what? It's an abhorrent and dystopian law along with Saudi Arabia's speech laws. He has never done a violent thing to a person, has not defrauded anyone, and is in jail for 10 years due to writing political parodies.

Sorry, comparing Austria's and Germany's anti-nazi-laws to Saudi Arabia is beyond ridiculous. Also, I don't know why you keep calling his songs "political parodies", they are outright neo-nazi propaganda...

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#126

Post by phpisthebest »

zeraynor wrote: post #47
phpisthebest wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do if they would contain magic words that make them run afoul of the plainly unconstitutional Espionage Act

It does seem difficult balancing an open and free society with mechanisms for protecting and maintaining government secrets, and punishing those who betray those secrets. Do you believe it is plainly unconstitutional simply because it posting to twitter involves words?

Democratic governments where the premise is "of the people by the people" I believe it is be highly undemocratic and corrupting to allow government to hold secrets from the very people that granted them power and are suppose to hold them to account via the ballot box

Democracy can only work when the citizens are informed about what their government is doing

The 1st amendment clearly states the Congress can not pass any law abridging speech. The espionage act clearly prevents whistleblowers and others from coming forward with information the government does not desire to be public which today is more often to be documents and evidence of crimes and embarrassing actions by government

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#127

Post by zeraynor »

phpisthebest wrote: post #126
zeraynor wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem difficult balancing an open and free society with mechanisms for protecting and maintaining government secrets, and punishing those who betray those secrets. Do you believe it is plainly unconstitutional simply because it posting to twitter involves words?

Democratic governments where the premise is "of the people by the people" I believe it is be highly undemocratic and corrupting to allow government to hold secrets from the very people that granted them power and are suppose to hold them to account via the ballot box Democracy can only work when the citizens are informed about what their government is doing The 1st amendment clearly states the Congress can not pass a…

I do understand the dangers of a government that can arbitrarily declare something a "state secret" and subsequently stifle speech on some arbitrary grounds.. but at the same time, can you recognize that there may be legitimate grounds to forbid dissemination of particular information on the grounds that it is advantageous to hostile entities, and thus a detriment to the US as a whole?

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#128

Post by phpisthebest »

zeraynor wrote: post #127
phpisthebest wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democratic governments where the premise is "of the people by the people" I believe it is be highly undemocratic and corrupting to allow government to hold secrets from the very people that granted them power and are suppose to hold them to account via the ballot box Democracy can only work when the citizens are informed about what their government is doing The 1st amendment clearly states the Congress can not pass a…

I do understand the dangers of a government that can arbitrarily declare something a "state secret" and subsequently stifle speech on some arbitrary grounds.. but at the same time, can you recognize that there may be legitimate grounds to forbid dissemination of particular information on the grounds that it is advantageous to hostile entities, and thus a detriment to the US as a whole?

While conceptually I can see such information can exist, I take it the same way I do free speech as a concept, over all I believe the negatives of allowing governments to hold secrets to be more damaging than any positives

Just like I do not believe tech companies, or governments to censor "misinformation" or "disinformation" because the negatives of controlled speech far far far out weigh any net positives that would come from censorship

Back to state secrets, I think the clear and obvious abuse of the practice should make it more than clear we should cease giving government agencies the "benefit of the doubt" and massively shift the Overton window back in the direction of total transparency

State secrets, if they exist at all, should be EXTREMELY abnormal, rare, and continually in need of justification. Today however state secrets are the default, standard procedure, and we need justification to open records which is a complete inversion of how it should be

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#129

Post by fein »

spacechild1 wrote: post #125
fein wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? It's an abhorrent and dystopian law along with Saudi Arabia's speech laws. He has never done a violent thing to a person, has not defrauded anyone, and is in jail for 10 years due to writing political parodies.

Sorry, comparing Austria's and Germany's anti-nazi-laws to Saudi Arabia is beyond ridiculous. Also, I don't know why you keep calling his songs "political parodies", they are outright neo-nazi propaganda...

They are parodies of songs and national socialism is a set of politics and philosophies - just because you don't like it doesn't make it not political.

> they are outright neo-nazi propaganda...

Yet again, so what? Are you insinuating that people are being assaulted by a song?

> Sorry, comparing Austria's and Germany's anti-nazi-laws to Saudi Arabia is beyond ridiculous.

No, it isn't, and if you're going to claim that it is, you need to explain why.

Re: Saudi Arabia sentenced a woman to 34 years in prison for tweeting

#130

Post by ethanbond »

fein wrote: post #129
spacechild1 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, comparing Austria's and Germany's anti-nazi-laws to Saudi Arabia is beyond ridiculous. Also, I don't know why you keep calling his songs "political parodies", they are outright neo-nazi propaganda...

They are parodies of songs and national socialism is a set of politics and philosophies - just because you don't like it doesn't make it not political. > they are outright neo-nazi propaganda... Yet again, so what? Are you insinuating that people are being assaulted by a song? > Sorry, comparing Austria's and Germany's anti-nazi-laws to Saudi Arabia is beyond ridiculous. No, it isn't, and if you're going to claim tha…

Hmm, sure. Perhaps Austria and Germany are a bit culturally traumatized by the horrors they inflicted upon the world under an ideology, and they wish (based on historical data) to prevent such an occurrence again?

I don’t feel qualified to say whether this is effective, but it’s pretty obvious why this is characteristically different from “ruling class wants to crush all dissent against ruling class.”

Post reply on HN