This article titled “China boosts internet surveillance” was written by Tania Branigan in Beijing, for The Guardian on Tuesday 26th July 2011 10.27 UTC

Police have told cafes, hotels and other businesses in central Beijing to install surveillance technology for Wi-Fi users or face fines and possible closure, in a further tightening of internet controls.

China has the world’s largest and most sophisticated web censorship and monitoring system, which it has tightened still further after the Middle Eastern uprisings. Measures included blocking major virtual private networks, which allow people to evade internet controls.

The new software, which costs about 20,000 yuan (£1,900), allows officials to check the identities of users and monitor their activity. Businesses that fail to comply face a fine of the same size and could have their licences revoked.

Strict controls already apply at internet cafes, which poorer people rely on for access.

It is unclear how strictly the measures will be enforced, and it appears that only Dongcheng district has told owners of the regulations. A staff member at its internet security unit said the initiative was city-wide, but Beijing police headquarters had not responded to a faxed query at time of writing.

The Dongcheng police officer added: “This regulation is made to enhance internet security and to assist public security bureaux to break criminal cases. Details of implementation are confidential.”

According to the New York Times, a notice from the district office said the measure would tackle offenders seeking to “conduct blackmail, traffic goods, gamble, propagate damaging information and spread computer viruses”.

“This is undoubtedly an invasion of Wi-Fi users’ privacy,” said Jason Chen, a 22-year-old Beijing resident.

“We have already felt the restriction on university campuses, since they have always been monitored. But this time, the control is stretching to cafes and people’s feeling of violation is sharper. If cafes cancel their Wi-Fi I will care a lot, and I believe young people will react strongly.”

Some venues in Dongcheng complained they were already losing custom after cutting off Wi-Fi.

“It is just unbelievable. Customers are not happy either,” said Leona Zhang, manager of the Contempio bar.

“Some owners simply think this is for the public security bureaux to make money from us. The charge is the same regardless of size, even for small ones with only two or three tables.”

Businesses in other parts of Beijing said they had not heard of the measure.

“If the regulation was implemented here, it would struggle to be accepted. The cost is too high,” said a worker at the New Seven Day Bar in Haidian.

“Furthermore, there is also the privacy of our customers to protect.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

I would just ignore the corrections and send my constituents whatever the hell I wanted. I don’t think Democrats can legally do that, at least not to that extent.

After murky statements by Obama’s chief henchman David Axelrod and other administration cronies in recent days about whether the president supports bringing back the censorship doctrine ‘fairness doctrine‘, it looks like we finally have an answer:

President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.

“As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said.

I’m certainly willing to take the president’s word that he doesn’t support bringing back the ‘fairness doctrine’ but we all know the left-wing kooks in congress tend to go off the reservation and pursue their own agenda even if it runs counter to his holiness president Obama.

NEW YORK — Protests were held in more than 20 cities over the use of degrading lyrics by the music industry, the Rev. Al Sharpton said.

The so-called Day of Outrage, organized by Sharpton’s National Action Network, included protests Tuesday in New York; Los Angeles; Detroit; Chicago; Houston; Richmond, Va.; Jacksonville, Fla.; and other cities.

Sharpton, who led a demonstration at the Motown Museum in Detroit, said, “I’m here in Motown in Detroit as a symbol of when music was not denigrating and was entertaining.”

He announced an initiative in April to combat the use of gutter terms in rap music.

Sharpton called Tuesday for the withdrawal of public funds from entertainment companies that “won’t clean up their act.”

Some people in the music industry have defended rappers’ free-speech rights but say the degrading words at the center of the debate should be treated the same as extreme profanities and consistently blanked out of clean and radio versions of songs.

[Washington Post]

NEW YORK (Billboard) – Pearl Jam fans and Internet watchdogs were up in arms Thursday after it was revealed that AT&T Inc. censored portions of the rock band’s live concert cybercast on Sunday.

While performing “Daughter” during the annual Lollapalooza festival in Chicago, the band segued into a portion of Pink Floyd’s “Another Brick in the Wall,” during which frontman Eddie Vedder sang, “George Bush, leave this world alone” and “George Bush, find yourself another home.” Those lyrics were missing from the broadcast.

Vedder also railed against oil giant BP during the set, and later, brought a disabled Iraq War veteran onstage to call for an end to the conflict. Neither of these segments were edited.

In a statement, AT&T attributed the bleeping to “a mistake by a Webcast vendor” that was “contrary to our policy. We have policies in place with respect to editing excessive profanity, but AT&T does not censor performances. We very much regret that this happened in the first place.”

The company also said it was “working with the band to post the song in its entirety,” a sentiment echoed by Pearl Jam on its official Web site (http://www.pearljam.com). “In the future, we will work even harder to ensure that our live broadcasts or webcasts are free from arbitrary edits,” read a statement on PearlJam.com.

The incident has generated hundreds of posts on the band’s Web forum as well as a response from the Future of Music Coalition, a strong advocate for “net neutrality” laws that ensure free speech online.

“This event shows that companies like AT&T will risk the appearance of censorship by turning off the sound on a webcast that’s being viewed by thousands of people, just because it works counter to their financial interests,” said FOMC executive director Jenny Toomey. “What do you think they will do to protect their financial interests on the web when no one is looking?”

[Reuters]

WASHINGTON – President Bush‘s most recent surgeon general accused the administration Tuesday of muzzling him for political reasons on hot-button health issues such as emergency contraception and abstinence-only education.

Dr. Richard Carmona, the nation’s 17th surgeon general, told lawmakers that all surgeons general have had to deal with politics but none more so than he.

For example, he said he wasn’t allowed to make a speech at the Special Olympics because it was viewed as benefiting a political opponent. However, he said was asked to speak at events designed to benefit Republican lawmakers.

“The reality is that the nation’s doctor has been marginalized and relegated to a position with no independent budget, and with supervisors who are political appointees with partisan agendas,” said Carmona, who served from 2002 to 2006.

Responding, the White House said Carmona was given the authority and had the obligation to be the leading voice for the health of all Americans.

“It’s disappointing to us if he failed to use his position to the fullest extent in advocating for policies he thought were in the best interests of the nation,” said Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto. “We believe Dr. Carmona received the support necessary to carry out his mission.”

Confirmation hearings are scheduled to be held Thursday for Dr. James Holsinger Jr., the Kentucky cardiologist Bush nominated as the nation’s 18th surgeon general. The nomination has been criticized by gay rights groups.

Carmona testified Tuesday at a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Also appearing were Drs. C. Everett Koop, who served as surgeon general from 1981-1889, and David Satcher, who served from 1998-2001.

“Political interference with the work of the surgeon general appears to have reached a new level in this administration,” said committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

Koop is probably the most recognized former surgeon general. He talked about AIDS as a public health issue rather than a moral issue, which won him many admirers and some critics. He said President Reagan was pressed to fire him every day, but Reagan would not interfere.

Koop said that after he left office he had more access to the secretary of Health and Human Services than his successor, Satcher, and that embarrassed him. “Dr. Carmona was treated with even less respect than Dr. Satcher,” Koop said.

A report condemning secondhand smoke was a hallmark of Carmona’s tenure.

Another report, on global health challenges, was never released after the administration demanded changes that he refused to make, Carmona said.

“I was told this would be a political document or you’re not going to release it.” Carmona said. “I said it can’t be a political document because the surgeon general never releases political documents. I release scientific documents that will help our elected officials and the citizens understand the complex world we live in and what their responsibilities are.”

He refused to identify the officials who sought the changes.

Carmona said he believed the surgeon general should show leadership on health issues. But his speeches were edited by political appointees, and he was told not to talk about certain issues. For example, he supported comprehensive sex education that would include abstinence in the curriculum, rather than focusing solely on abstinence.

“However, there was already a policy in place that didn’t want to hear the science, but wanted to quote, unquote preach abstinence, which I felt was scientifically incorrect,” Carmona said.

[AP]

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the city of Slidell on Tuesday for displaying a painting of Jesus in a courthouse lobby, saying it violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

The ACLU sued after the Slidell City Court refused to voluntarily remove the picture and a message below it that reads: “To Know Peace, Obey These Laws.” The ACLU says the portrait — an image of Jesus presenting the New Testament — is a religious icon of the Eastern Orthodox branch of Christianity.

“We did not file this lawsuit because the ACLU is anti-religion … We did file this lawsuit because we believe this display is clearly in violation of the law,” said Vincent Booth, president and acting executive director of the Louisiana ACLU chapter.

The suit was filed on behalf of an unidentified person who complained to the ACLU about the picture. Named as defendants were the city of Slidell, St. Tammany Parish and City Judge James Lamz. St. Tammany Parish is being sued because it partially funds the court, the ACLU said.

On Saturday, Lamz said the picture would stay up unless a federal judge ordered it removed. He said he didn’t believe the portrait violates the Constitution, but the issue should be decided in federal court.

Lamz could not comment Tuesday because of the pending litigation, his office said.

Before refusing to take the painting down, Lamz consulted Douglas Laycock, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School who has argued before the Supreme Court.

Laycock said he told Lamz that the legal issues in the case aren’t clear-cut and could set legal precedent.

“I don’t know how far the two sides will want to push things,” Laycock added.

The painting has been on display at the courthouse for nearly a decade and hadn’t provoked any complaints prior to the ACLU’s recent objections, said Michael Johnson, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian civil rights group representing the city and parish.

Johnson, whose group is often at odds with the ACLU, said the painting sends an inclusive message of equal justice under the law. He said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that similar displays in public forums are constitutional.

[AP]

BAGHDAD — Dozens of Iraqi citizens have been murdered after using the Internet to access adult websites, according to Middle Eastern media reports.

“We have received information from many sources that militants are operating spies inside Internet cafes just to find out who is browsing sites they have deemed offensive to Islam,” Iraqi Aid Association spokesperson Fatah Ahmed said. The IAA is a Baghdad-based nongovernmental aid agency.

According to Ahmed, most of the killings and abductions have happened directly after the victim leaves an Internet café.

“It is very serious because in an Islamic country in which violence is spreading on a daily basis, people search for some entertainment and it is found today only on the internet,” Ahmed said. “There are no places to go, so young people are making friends via chatrooms, which are now also being condemned by Islamic extremists.”

One victim of kidnapping and assault, university student Ibraheem Abdel-Qahar, told Al-Jazeera that he was kidnapped after leaving a café, then blindfolded, transported to what he believes was a house on the outskirts of Baghdad, and then beaten and tortured.

“They told me to take off all my clothes and handcuffed me. They started to beat me and use cigarettes to burn my legs,” Abdel-Qahar said, adding that he was beaten with an iron bar, and forced to drink chicken blood and his own urine.

Abdel-Qahar said that he was desperate, shouting questions at his abusers as to why they were assaulting him.

“After three hours of continuous torture they told me that it was because I was watching non-Muslim sites on the internet,” Abdel-Qahar said.

Following six days of torture, Abdel-Qahar said he was dropped off near his home and told that if he was found surfing adult sites again he would be killed. The perpetrators also advised him to seek salvation in the local mosque.

Armed marauders have not spared the proprietors who operate Internet cafés, either; in February, Internet café owners Fadhel Ibraheem and Youssef Ala’a were tortured and beheaded, reportedly for allowing access to adult sites in their café.

“It wasn’t my brother’s fault,” said Yehia Ala’a, the brother of Youssef. “He was just offering the computers and Internet access for people to use. The people who search for the Internet entertainment just want to have some distraction in the middle of this hell and hypocritical society.”

The violence toward Internet café patrons and proprietors has not gone unnoticed in other segments of Iraqi society. Baghdad University Professor Hussam Abdallah said that the University offers access to the Internet, but does so “on the condition that the browsing is controlled, and pornographic sites are blocked.”

“We have also prohibited online chatting,” Abdallah said. “We do not want to give extremists an excuse to attack us.”

[XBIZ]

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The Supreme Court ruled against a former high school student Monday in the “Bong Hit 4 Jesus” banner case — a split decision that limits students’ free speech rights.

Joseph Frederick was 18 when he unveiled the 14-foot paper sign on a public sidewalk outside his Juneau, Alaska, high school in 2002.

Principal Deborah Morse confiscated it and suspended Frederick. He sued, taking his case all the way to the nation’s highest court.

The justices ruled 6-3 that Frederick’s free speech rights were not violated by his suspension over what the majority’s written opinion called a “sophomoric” banner.

“It was reasonable for (the principal) to conclude that the banner promoted illegal drug use– and that failing to act would send a powerful message to the students in her charge,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court’s majority.

Roberts added that while the court has limited student free speech rights in the past, young people do not give up all their First Amendment rights when they enter a school.

Roberts was supported by Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito. Breyer noted separately he would give Morse qualified immunity from the lawsuit, but did not sign onto the majority’s broader free speech limits on students.

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, “This case began with a silly nonsensical banner, (and) ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs, so long as someone could perceive that speech to contain a latent pro-drug message.”

He was backed by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

At issue was the discretion schools should be allowed to limit messages that appear to advocate illegal drug use. “Bong,” as noted in the appeal filed with the justices, “is a slang term for drug paraphernalia.”

The incident occurred in January 2002 just outside school grounds when the Olympic torch relay was moving through the Alaska capital on its way to the Salt Lake City, Utah, Winter Games.

Though he was standing on a public sidewalk, the school argued Frederick was part of a school-sanctioned event, because students were let out of classes and accompanied by their teachers.

Morse ordered the senior to take down the sign, but he refused. That led to a 10-day suspension for violating a school policy on promoting illegal drug use.

Frederick filed suit, saying his First Amendment rights were infringed. A federal appeals court in San Francisco agreed, concluding the school could not show Frederick had disrupted the school’s educational mission by showing a banner off campus.

Former independent counsel Kenneth Starr argued for the principal that a school “must be able to fashion its educational mission” without undue hindsight from the courts.

Morse, who attended arguments in March, told CNN at the time: “I was empowered to enforce the school board’s written policies at that time aimed at keeping illegal substances out of the school environment.”

As for Frederick, he is halfway across the globe, teaching English to students in China.

Now 24, he told reporters in March that he displayed the banner in a deliberate attempt to provoke a response from principal Morse, by whom he had been disciplined previously. But Frederick claimed his message of free speech is very important to him, even if the wording of the infamous banner itself was not.

“I find it absurdly funny,” he said. “I was not promoting drugs. … I assumed most people would take it as a joke.”

[CNN]

Here’s the contract that Angelina Jolie tried to get reporters to sign in advance of interviewing her in connection with “A Mighty Heart,” the star’s new movie about murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. The document, drafted by Jolie’s overzealous Los Angeles lawyer, triggered a boycott from several media outlets that refused to sign such a restrictive agreement. The document warned that any violations of its stipulations would cause “irreparable harm” to the 32-year-old actress and that she could seek to enforce its terms “by injunction or other equitable relief.” Jolie, who apparently was not willing to address questions about Brad Pitt and their familial brood, subsequently backed down on her demands in the face of a journalist revolt (the movie’s New York City premiere benefited Reporters Without Borders, a press freedom group). This is the not first time, however, that Jolie has tried to restrict the use of interviews. Click here to view an “interview agreement” circulated by her and Pitt’s publicists in advance of the couple doing press in Japan in connection with their 2005 film “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.” CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO SEE EVERYTHING

[The Smoking Gun]