We won't let politically motivated hacks silence us; Guardian, 9/9/16

Chris Stone, Guardian; We won't let politically motivated hacks silence us:

"...[W]e also know why we’ve been attacked: because – like the others in the hackers’ sights – we believe in human rights, democracy and open societies, and we’re willing to act on our principles.

Today’s political hackers remind me of the Watergate burglars, only now they’re breaking into servers instead of offices. Now, as then, the political bosses behind these break-ins hope to use the stolen material to embarrass or discredit their enemies. But the lesson of Watergate is that this tactic can easily boomerang, bolstering the democratic credentials of those attacked, and bringing the real discredit back on the dirty tricksters.

Think of the organizations whose work has been stolen by DC Leaks as a new “Enemies List” – reminiscent of the roster President Nixon maintained of 20 journalists, lawyers, politicians and other public figures whom he reviled. It was certainly dangerous to be among the president’s 20 enemies, but as Nixon’s power waned, being on the list became a badge of honor.

At least a couple of those included later described it as among their greatest achievements. Yes, you had been under surveillance and perhaps worse: maybe your office was burglarized, your phone calls tapped or your career derailed. But inclusion was also a mark of effectiveness: you had been speaking up enough to disturb a president who himself proved to be the true enemy of American democracy.

These recent intrusions, and I expect there will be more, are a symptom of an aggressive assault on democratic principles that is taking place globally. As a private philanthropy, we have the independence to persist. We will learn from DC Leaks and will continue to support open society no matter whose enemies’ lists we land on."

More of Kremlin’s Opponents Are Ending Up Dead; New York Times, 8/20/16

Andrew E. Kramer, New York Times; More of Kremlin’s Opponents Are Ending Up Dead:

"Other countries, notably Israel and the United States, pursue targeted killings, but in a strict counterterrorism context. No other major power employs murder as systematically and ruthlessly as Russia does against those seen as betraying its interests abroad. Killings outside Russia were even given legal sanction by the nation’s Parliament in 2006...

“The government is using the special services to liquidate its enemies,” Gennadi V. Gudkov, a former member of Parliament and onetime lieutenant colonel in the K.G.B., said in an interview. “It was not just Litvinenko, but many others we don’t know about, classified as accidents or maybe semi-accidents.”"

Obama Declassifies Documents Related to Argentina’s Dirty War; Wall Street Journal, 3/24/16

Ryan Dube and Taos Turner, Wall Street Journal; Obama Declassifies Documents Related to Argentina’s Dirty War:

""Democracies have to have the courage to acknowledge when we don’t live up to the ideals that we stand for, when we’ve been slow to speak up for human rights, and that was the case here,” Mr. Obama added.

Mr. Macri, who had asked the U.S. to declassify the documents, said Mr. Obama’s visit on the coup anniversary was an opportunity for Argentines to say “never again in Argentina to political violence, never again to institutional violence.”

“Today we need to reaffirm our commitment to democracy and human rights,” he added.

The State Department has declassified over 4,000 documents from the Dirty War period. The documents underscore the divide among some U.S. officials about how to respond to the military regime, which ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983.

At the center of the controversy is former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who met with top officials from Argentina’s military regime shortly after the coup on March 24, 1976."

Should There Be a Right to Be Forgotten?; American Libraries, 1/11/16

Amy Carlton, American Libraries; Should There Be a Right to Be Forgotten? :

"ALA’s Office for Information Technology Policy (OITP) hosted a discussion at Midwinter about the right of European Union citizens to have links to certain personal information removed from the results of web searches on their names. Should the United States adopt similar rules?

The panel included James G. Neal, university librarian emeritus of Columbia University, trustee of the Freedom to Read Foundation, and a member of ALA’s Executive Board; Abigail Slater, vice president, legal and regulatory policy, for the Internet Association; and Tomas Lipinski, dean of the School of Information Studies at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and a member of IFLA’s Committee on Copyright and Other Legal Matters. Alan S. Inouye, director of OITP, moderated the discussion."

Internet Access Is Not a Human Right; New York Times, 1/4/12

Vincent G. Cerf, New York Times; Internet Access Is Not a Human Right:

"Over the past few years, courts and parliaments in countries like France and Estonia have pronounced Internet access a human right.

But that argument, however well meaning, misses a larger point: technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself. There is a high bar for something to be considered a human right. Loosely put, it must be among the things we as humans need in order to lead healthy, meaningful lives, like freedom from torture or freedom of conscience. It is a mistake to place any particular technology in this exalted category, since over time we will end up valuing the wrong things."