The State of Affairs in Russia

[Razgovory]

It's RT, it's bullshit. 

Of course it's bullshit.  In 2010 US Soldiers paraded in Red Square as part of the Victory Day celebrations.  You can't get any closer then that.

[Jacob]

Since I didn't read their report, I can't say for sure, but I'm very dubious that Amnesty laid out all the fantastic benefits of increased surveillance, reduced civil liberties, etc.

Seems to me that Amnesty International generally lays out the facts, but is nonetheless frequently mischaracterized in the media.

To save you the trouble to go looking, here's what it says about surveillance:

Surveillance

In July, the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act entered into force, extending the reach of the authorities' interception powers by providing potentially wide-ranging extraterritorial effects to UK interception warrants. Sufficient safeguards were not in place to ensure that such surveillance was authorized and carried out in conformity with the rights to privacy and freedom of expression.

In December, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) made public its open judgment in the first part of a complaint brought by Amnesty International and other NGOs about the UK authorities' communications surveillance practices. The IPT found that the authorities' surveillance practices were in accordance with the law. Significant portions of the proceedings were held in secret

Seems pretty even handed to me.

[Razgovory]

I have never regarded privacy as a fundamental right.  The right is not explicitly laid out it in the constitution and everyone seemed real proud when I showed an interest in telescopes.

[Admiral Yi]

Jacob: I was using evidence in a different sense than you are.  I was using it in the sense of pros and cons, costs and benefits, arguments for and arguments against.

[alfred russel]

I have never regarded privacy as a fundamental right.  The right is not explicitly laid out it in the constitution...

Putting aside whether fundamental rights need to be in the US constitution, the constitution does prevent unreasonable search and seizure. If the government can't search your stuff (without a reason), that seems to mean you have a right to keep in private.

[grumbler]

Jacob: I was using evidence in a different sense than you are.  I was using it in the sense of pros and cons, costs and benefits, arguments for and arguments against.

I think you guys are talking past one another.  You argue that AI doesn't present both sides of the argument, and Jake argues that they lay out the whole thing - which is to say that they lay out the only side that exists.  I don't think that you are going to get him to see what you see.

[grumbler]

I have never regarded privacy as a fundamental right.  The right is not explicitly laid out it in the constitution...

Putting aside whether fundamental rights need to be in the US constitution...

No need to put it aside, the Ninth Amendment specifically states that they do not.  The Constitution is a descriptor and limit on government power, not on the rights of the people.

[CountDeMoney]

I have never regarded privacy as a fundamental right.  The right is not explicitly laid out it in the constitution and everyone seemed real proud when I showed an interest in telescopes.

  Mrs. Simmons has moved on to lace this season!

[Razgovory]

I have never regarded privacy as a fundamental right.  The right is not explicitly laid out it in the constitution and everyone seemed real proud when I showed an interest in telescopes.

  Mrs. Simmons has moved on to lace this season!

Finally, someone realizes that the post was not an argument but a joke.

[Ed Anger]

It's RT, it's bullshit. 

Of course it's bullshit.  In 2010 US Soldiers paraded in Red Square as part of the Victory Day celebrations.  You can't get any closer then that.

Obama dropped the ball. THANKS OBAMA

[Jacob]

Jacob: I was using evidence in a different sense than you are.  I was using it in the sense of pros and cons, costs and benefits, arguments for and arguments against.

Fair enough.

I don't think that's Amnesty International's job, nor that it should be. Their purpose is centred around human rights. Insofar as they talk about surveillance issues, it has to do with how it impacts human rights; economic or security benefits are entirely orthogonal to their mission. In the same way, if a country is using torture or other violations of human rights to combat political opponents or crime, they are not going to spend time talking about whether the intel is actionable or whether it actually serves to keep opponents in check.

What I meant is that if there are no or fewer issues in an area of concern, or if there is progress in an area, they will mention that as well.

But yeah, they don't look at stuff peripheral or incidental to human rights concerns; they identify human rights violations and concerns globally, and track progress and regress on those issues. Which, IMO, is as it should be.

[Syt]

http://rt.com/politics/236007-russia-opposition-attitude-poll/

'Opposition is necessary...but we wouldn't vote for them,' most Russians hold

Over half of all Russians agree that an opposition is a necessary part of the political system, but very few agreed with the current demands of opposition politicians or said that they would like to see those people in power one day.

According to the latest research by independent pollster Levada Center, the proportion of Russians who agreed with the statement that an opposition is a necessary part of the political system was 58 percent. At the same time, only 19 percent of respondents said an opposition was necessary to ensure the timely replacement of state authorities.

Some 22 percent of respondents opposed the very existence of opposition movements in the country, saying it only atomizes the community by causing unnecessary conflicts. In addition, most who hold that view see all such efforts as futile - only 15 percent said they thought that opposition activities were obstructing the authorities' work aimed at solving the problems that stand before the society.

Politicians that are considered 'non-system opposition' claimed even fewer supporters – only 3 percent of those polled said they sympathized with persons from the Solidarity Coalition and a further 12 percent said they sympathized with some parts of the Solidarity agenda. It should be noted, that the term 'non-system' was used more due to inertia of public perception as most of the personalities behind the coalition – such as Boris Nemtsov or Aleksey Navalny – already have registered political parties and participate in elections.

Levada Deputy Head Aleksey Grazhdankin said in comments to Kommersant that the current state of public mood could be explained by the absence of genuine opposition in the country and the great effort of the authorities to discredit any dissent in the eyes of the broader public. However, he did not delve into defining a 'real' opposition and pointing out its differences from projects that currently bear this name in Russian politics.

In the same poll, Levada asked the public about their attitude to the slogans proposed for the forthcoming major opposition event – the 'Spring March' scheduled for March 1. The most popular ideas were "passing laws against illegal enrichment of civil servants" with 32 percent of supporters and "ensuring the fairness of elections" with 30 percent. The 'Stopping the war in Ukraine' slogan claimed 18 percent of supporters.

Other demands garnered almost negligible support. The call to cancel the alleged censorship in mass media was shared by only 5 percent of Russian citizens, and "decentralization of power" and "release of all political prisoners" claimed 2 percent of supporters each.

However, one of the organizers of the rally, Leonid Volkov, explained the lack of support by the fact that the slogans had been developed on the basis of requests of those who regularly attend protest rallies rather than the broad public.

[Queequeg]

http://www.rferl.org/content/nemtsov-death/26873635.html

fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck

[Martinus]

http://www.rferl.org/content/nemtsov-death/26873635.html

fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck

is this in any way surprising, Spellus?

[Malthus]

Being a "fierce critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin" while actually in Russia seems like a poor choice as far as longevity goes.