Quantcast
Channel: VICE CA
Viewing all 38002 articles
Browse latest View live

Nigeria's New Anti-Gay Law Is Just a Smokescreen for Government Incompetence

$
0
0

Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan

On Sunday Kenyan author Binyavanga Wainaina made news around the world by coming out in an article first published by Africa Is a Country, and then by The Guardian. After the articles spread, Wainaina became, in the words of the BBC, "one of the most high profile Africans" to disclose that he was gay.

The Kenyan's decision to write publicly about his sexuality was inspired, in part, by Nigeria’s Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, which was signed into law earlier this month. Two days after the article was published, Wainaina tweeted:

The law is a throwback to the days of the country’s military dictatorship, and makes it illegal for gay people to even hold a meeting. It criminalizes gay clubs, associations, and organizations, and threatens those involved with them with 14 years in prison. And if you don’t report “suspected homosexuals,” you could receive up to five years in jail yourself. The law also states that anyone who “directly or indirectly makes [a] public show of [a] same-sex amorous relationship in Nigeria commits an offense and shall each be liable on conviction to a term of ten years in prison."

Which is confusing—how exactly could you make an "indirect" public show of same-sex amorous feelings, and how would the police recognize it? If I’m out on the streets of Lagos and I tell a male friend I like his trainers, should I expect to do hard time?

The law is almost comic in its ridiculousness, but also incredibly depressing and deadly serious. Dozens of gay men have already been arrested under it and there have been reports of mob violence. "Among the poor and powerless, the law will be an excuse for lynchings and police harassment," says Tolu Ogunlesi, a Nigerian journalist.

Among the political and military elite, however, the law may well be used selectively. Some of these grand men, including one prominent rival of president Goodluck Jonathan, are rumored to be gay. So if you have cash and power, you'll presumably be able to keep on doing whatever you like in the privacy of your own massive home, as long as you aren't seen as being too much of a threat to any of your powerful political enemies.

Whether this is true or not, the Nigerian gay rights activist Rashidi Williams hit the nail on the head when he told me that the damage caused by this law is "actually for the ordinary Nigerian LGBT citizen, whose right to health is taken away, exposed to violence, deprived of association and peaceful assembly, invaded of their privacy, robbed of their sense of self-determination, condemned to the annals of hell and damaged psychosocially." It’s populist politics at its worst—punishing ordinary people for political gain.

Since anyone can be arrested on the pretext that they are gay—or because they know someone who's gay—it is an abuse of the human rights of all Nigerians, gay or straight. As Mausi Segun, Human Rights Watch’s Nigeria researcher, told me: "This law criminalizes what are essentially private, personal relationships. Any Nigerian could be targeted."

On January 21, the US ambassador to Nigeria, James Entwistle, threatened to scale back American health programs in response to the law. On the same day, the former Nigerian Ambassador to the US, Dahiru Suleiman, described homosexuality as "animalistic and degrading to humanity."

Weirdly, the new law also criminalizes something that is already criminal in Nigeria: being gay. "Why do they want to have four laws banning homosexuality?" asked Olumide Makanjuola, executive director of the Initiative for Equality in Nigeria. Sharia law, the criminal code, and Nigeria's anti-sodomy laws all more than cover the 'offense' of being gay. "I have always hidden my sexuality, even before this new bill was signed into law," one young gay Nigerian told me. "Being gay isn't something you parade before family and friends, because the chance that they won’t understand is very high." 

In a conservative, religious country, homophobia is rife, so gay marriage has never been on the agenda. "We’re not asking for same-sex marriage because it’s not a conversation Africa is ready to have," says Makanjuola, who is far more concerned that the clinics and meetings he organizes for gay men to talk about HIV/AIDS will be raided under the terms of the law. "Doctors and lawyers work for me. The work they do would be seen as supporting homosexuality, which means that I could end up indirectly sending people to prison," he says.

The renowned LGBT activist Bisi Alimi—who had to leave Nigeria for London after the abuse he received for being the first man to come out on Nigerian television—also told me that he was most concerned about the registration of clubs and the provision of services. The Nigerian constitution protects rights to freedom of assembly, association, and equality before the law, but apparently that’s not a big deal to the current government as far as gay people are concerned.

In many ways, though, this piece of legislation is about what so many populist measures are about: diverting attention from massive government incompetence. "The bill is presently fueling hatred and violence against LGBTI people across Nigeria," the Lagos-based human rights researcher Damian Ugwu wrote to me. "For now, it is conveniently serving the purpose which it was meant to serve in the first place—successfully distracting the attentions of Nigerians from the worsening political and economic situation in the country." The situation Damian refers to is one the government had once promised to tackle, not avoid.

During his 2011 election campaign, Goodluck Jonathan talked about addressing widespread corruption and rampant inequality in Nigeria. With enormous majorities, some good ministers and a stable party, Jonathan was in as good a position as any to do something about his country’s problems. But, with an election now looming next year—which many in his own party don’t want him to contest—things are worse than ever.

The militant group Boko Haram continues to terrorize the northeast of the country, deadly ethnic-religious clashes are taking place in the center, endemic corruption is getting worse, and there are persistent power shortages. At the same time, the situation in the oil-rich Niger Delta continues to be an absurd parody of uncontrollable greed. Oil theft is rampant, militancy is on the rise again, and the region has stolen the piracy crown from Somalia. Multi-national companies continue to desecrate the environment and local elites turn a blind eye while happily enriching themselves.

With all these issues going unaddressed, the one thing Jonathan could guarantee support on was bashing homosexuality. International condemnation of the law has triggered nationalistic defenses from across the political and religious spectrum within Nigeria, and the beleaguered president is benefiting from that.

As Africa Confidential’s Andrew Weir points out, "Unscrupulous politicians in Africa who have come under attack from Western governments or NGOs for abuses of human rights or for stealing public funds sometimes try to deflect the criticism by picking fights with the West over the gay question. They can be fairly certain, unfortunately, that the evangelical churches, which have enormous influence, will support their homophobia."

Bisi Alimi (Screenshot via)

"It’s pretty difficult talking to people who can’t see beyond religious bigotry," Bisi Alimi agrees.  

The idea that homosexuality is 'un-African' or a 'Western perversion' is trotted out across Nigeria, while Christian and Muslim fundamentalists preach that being gay is an abomination to God or Allah. But if anything is a 'Western perversion,' it’s homophobia. Across Africa, the majority of laws banning homosexuality were introduced by colonial powers. These colonial powers may have removed similar laws from their own statute books, but their affect has proved longer lasting throughout the continent. It’s no surprise, then, that homosexuality is illegal in 41 out of 53 Commonwealth countries, because guess who wanted to make a big song and dance about how evil and ungodly being gay was? Imperial Brits.  

Moreover, as Rashidi Williams points out, "Religion led to the legalization of laws against homosexuals in the colonial era." Indigenous Nigerian culture was often not this way. Gods of West Africa's Yoruba people regularly had no fixed gender identity, and the yan daudu—"men who act like women"—of the Muslim north were tolerated as "part of an unremarkable but fringe subculture" until the recent revival of religious fundamentalism in that part of the country.

"White people have been able to demonize our history to make us feel inferior," says Alimi, cutting to the heart of the Nigerian hypocrisy that labels homosexuality as an effete Western evil, as well as Western hypocrisy regarding "unenlightened Africans."

John Kerry and the British High Commission have condemned the law, but whether this will amount to anything remains to be seen. "The international community cannot sanction Nigeria because they need our resources. So it is just a mere threat," says Mussodiq Sanni, chairman of the Muslim Lawyers’ Association of Nigeria.

While there is a chance that the attention this law has attracted will lead to a space for an educated conversation about homosexuality in and outside of Nigeria, it seems just as likely that ordinary Nigerians will suffer while their government continues to rob the country blind, pausing every now and then to field the odd piece of sanctimonious criticism from international governments too interested in Nigeria’s resources to actually do anything meaningful about continuous human rights violations.

Follow Oscar on Twitter: @ocarrickettnow


The VICE Guide to Newcastle: Loading Up on Roast Beef in Newcastle

$
0
0

How did we get here already? It appears that it's time to unleash the fifth and final episode of the VICE Guide to Newcastle. We had a lot of fun making this series and throughout the entire time we were out in England, we ate about 10,000 scotch eggs and 5,000 meat pies. That's why for the very last episode we profiled all of the amazing British food we got to gorge on. The myth that the English have a dull palette is, well, getting dull. Check this episode out to see what a real roast beef overload, fueled by Newcastle Brown Ale, looks like.

The Sad World of Adults Pretending to Be Kids for Retweets

$
0
0

Can you imagine taking a few hours out of your day to sit down with a crayon and forge a child's exam paper? Or trying to convince thousands of people that one of your kids picked up a bra and dropped a witty quip about it being a "booby trap"? If the answer is "yes", then you might not be as weird as you think. You might just be one of the legions of "Twitter comedians" who present clearly fabricated child-related anecdotes as things that really, definitely happened, purely to pick up brownie points from strangers on the internet.

That's right: adults lying about stuff kids said is the new animals doing funny faces on the internet. After all, what are kids but animals with slightly better communication skills?

In terms of the trend's Twitter popularity, it's not yet up there with people arguing about David Moyes or RTing "Brazil smiles when Niall Horan smiles". But these types of fake tweet are slowly colonising the platform and the multitude of viral websites that feed off of it. It's a phenomenon that is clearly bullshit; bad jokes told like news stories, fallen for and spread by idiots. A bit like crop circles.

The formula is simple: think of a phonetic mistake that's vaguely amusing but that a child is unlikely to have made in real life – getting "the Smurfs" mixed up with "The Smiths", for example. In an ideal world, this phonetic mistake will hint at some higher truth about humanity; the more sentimental, the more chance your fake tweet has of being picked up by UpWorthy and shunted around the internet by mums who just got Facebook. Attribute this quote to your unknowing children, post it on Twitter and hope it goes down as well as this one did with all the twee people on there who spend their time making jokes about badgers and biscuits:

Like most twee things, it's difficult to figure out quite why it's so annoying. It's not that it harms the world in any specific, grievous way. There are certainly far more worrying things to stress about and it's not like I make a habit of playing Twitter cop. There are many other types of lie on Twitter that I don't understand but that I don't give a second thought to. There's just something about this trend and its flagrant attention seeking – not to mention its cynical use of kids as props for added "ahhhh" factor – that really grates on me. If you're being highfalutin, it's a weird and sad nadir in the continued internet-driven devolution that's turning fully-grown adults into infants. If I'm saying it straight, I just wish irritating people would stop trying to con me.

As with the majority of modern injustices, the trend now has its very own whistle-blower. Step forward @FaaakeTweets, a kind of vigilante social media manager account run by a shadowy Snowden-type figure intent on calling bullshit on the cutesy stories and anecdotes knocked up by these Sarah Millican-loving fraudsters. The account operates in quite a simple way; it just links to said tweets, @s the offender and then shouts "FAKE" or "DIDN'T HAPPEN" or "THEY DIDN'T", and watches them get enraged and defensive about it.

A guy known as Mr Nick Harvey is probably the Picasso of the form, an old master who shuffled off his online coil on Tuesday because Fake Tweets' flagged his tweets a few times. I'm sure Nick's a thoroughly decent bloke, someone who loves his family, works hard and doesn't shirk a round when it's his turn at the bar. But his assertion that he was forced off Twitter by "trolls" looks pretty over-egged when you realise that Stan Collymore will still be live-tweeting League 1 goal updates this weekend despite having been bombarded for years with disgusting racial slurs and death threats:

You don't have to be a moron to fall for one of these fake tweets. When seen at third or fourth hand, perhaps on a website with an editorial team, it's easy to see how the lines can get blurred. You think: 'That must be true, surely? Not that many people could have fallen for it.' It just becomes an amusing story that you can't be arsed to research, like anything published at the Sunday Sport website. There's no crime in that, but I still can't help but wonder about the people who go out of their way to create these things.

A few of them also have a horrible classist streak to them – the one above being a perfect example. It's as if Ed Brody believes he's some kind of reporter dispatching from the ignorant coalface of our culture. Venturing out into the sheer hell of Balham Sainsbury's to let his Sherlock-loving chums on Twitter know what the povvos have been getting confused about today.

First of all, nobody would ever get those two very different pronunciations of "Sharon" mixed up. It's a joke that only works visually. And the idea that someone would really be able to hear that much of somebody's conversation in a supermarket without them moving on is kinda bullshit, too. In fact, it's shitty on every level.

Fake tweets come in many different shapes and styles of fake, but by far the most prominent seem to be conversations that the tweeters claim to have had with their own children. Looking after a young kid must be pretty arduous and alienating at times, so you can understand why things like Mumsnet and gin exist. But these tweets seem to be concocted in the vain hope of being favourited by some fifth-rate blazer 'n' T-shirt wearing comedian who guest-starred in one episode of Rev and has gained 2,500 followers as a result.

I think these are some of the most heinous examples. Not just because of the horrible tone or twee vocab, or because they're faker than a Shepherd's Bush market Barcelona shirt, but because of the awful cultural shoehorning going on. Even when the parents try to pretend they know anything about their kids, they think they watch the Smurfs. What year are these people living in? The tweets are designed purely to make sense to other people on Twitter who are of the same age and demographic as the writer themselves.

Then you've got this weird propensity for using words like "poo". Mr Nick Harvey clearly never had this conversation. Nobody talks like that. It's basically ripped straight out of Outnumbered. So why does he do it?

Sometimes the parents go a step further, putting pen to paper and paper to scanner in order to capitalise on the inherent naivety of children. Actually going and faking a child's handwriting and signature is probably worse, and IDK, illegal perhaps? I'm not that well versed in the laws of these things, but I'm pretty sure if you did that to an adult you'd be in trouble. Though, of course, there is the handy get-out-clause that these kids might not even exist anyway.

It's easy to make fun of these falsified conversations and scribblings for being lame and twee...

...but the really important question is why? Why the hell do they do it? Why do they fake letters and words from their own children, like desperate kidnappers? Who thinks that's a productive use of time?

Well, people do a lot of strange things for attention on the internet. They start celebrity blogs where they scrawl wild MS Paint accusations, they make sub-Tim Minchin (and that is pretty fucking "sub") topical comedy piano songs, they sell their virginities, they make squeaky voiced video blogs, they start Will Ferrell parody accounts

Essentially, the internet is a big room full of wankers making a lot of noise, and maybe the realities of your own life just aren't quite noisy enough to get that mass attention. When the nature of the game is standing out from the crowd, all sorts of madness and skulduggery starts to go on. Harry Styles can tweet about the things that actually happen to him and people pay attention. He can get 171,000 RTs just for saying something about eating toast in the shower. For the vast majority of us, this sadly isn't the case.

At the end of the day, it's nothing to get upset about. It's nothing worth going to The Hague for. It's not the worst thing that's ever happened to the world; it's just really, really annoying. So for that, we must thank Fake Tweets, who are truly doing God's work until these kids can grow into teenagers, do a little genealogical soul-searching and confront their parents one night over dinner.

"Er, Dad? Why did you tell some strangers on the internet once that I got the words 'radio' and 'rodeo' mixed up?"

Then, and only then, will the sheer weirdness of their actions begin to haunt them.

Follow Clive on Twitter: @thugclive

More stuff about the internet:

How Jihadists Use the Internet

I Went Looking for Love at the Tinder Launch Party

WATCH – Meeting Kim Dotcom: The Man Behind Mega

VICE News: Khat Power

$
0
0

Khat is a chewable herbal stimulant, popular among the UK's Somali and Yemeni communities. Despite there being little or no evidence that the drug causes harm to its users, the British government is working to outlaw khat. Home Secretary Theresa May says she's worried that without a ban, the UK will become a hub for smuggling it to the US and Europe, where for the most part it is already illegal. Meanwhile, experts warn that a ban might alienate Somalis in the UK and cut off vital exports from Kenya, the UK’s largest khat supplier.

VICE News followed the khat trail, from the farms of Meru, central Kenya to the suburbs of west London, meeting businesspeople, users and community members all keen to have their say. With exclusive access to a London khat warehouse and khat cafes in the English capital and Nairobi, we explored the industry and the implications of a ban at home and abroad. Smugglers are happy, the youth of Kenya are not.

Female Game Designers Are Being Threatened with Rape

$
0
0

A screenshot of Quinn's Depression Quest game. Photo via.

Zoe Quinn, a game designer, was unaware that her father was in the ICU for several days because she had stopped using her phone—it took a roundabout message from one of her cousins to deliver the news. The reason Quinn wasn’t fielding calls was because an influx of male internet strangers were dialing her ad nauseam to spout rape threats and jack off on the other end of the line. They were targeting her because Quinn was trying to release a video game on Steam, and evidently her womanhood really set them off. It’s a troubling issue, and unfortunately it’s nowhere near the first of its kind.

“Gamer” has become a dirty word over the last few years, nearly becoming synonymous with someone known for ego-tripping, self-entitledness, and intolerance. It seems like not even one month can go by before a crowd of loud, terrible nerds do or say something that makes everyone who has touched a DualShock seem by proxy a misogynist dirtbag. Be it through the normalization of sexual harassment in video game tournaments, or out-of-control rape joke controversies propagated by close-minded webcomic titans—a large portion of video game culture is disappointingly determined to make women uncomfortable. The hellfire only grew after Anita Sarkeesian proposed to point out some of games’ ongoing problems in a video series, that was met with a backlash deeming that her and her partner were wrong, proclaiming hopes that they’d fail, die, be violently assaulted, and other responses that reinforce that an issue does in fact exist.

As 2013 wrapped up, there was an exceptionally pathetic furor over Dina Abou Karam, a supporter for feminist causes, being hired as the community manager for a new Mega Man spinoff. That vitriol presented a platform for Zoe Quinn to come out and voice her frustrations about the hostility towards women in the game world, while still weathering a harassment campaign herself.

Quinn’s own game, Depression Quest, is “an interactive fiction game where you play as someone living with depression.”The game has successfully made it onto Steam—a video game distribution platform with over 75 million registered users—despite its detractors, but the entire affair has left Quinn struggling to find her takeaway. I spoke with Quinn about the trials of Depression Quest, what kept her going, and how conditions can be improved within a community where many outspoken gamers will likely continue to be insufferable.

VICE: Why did you make Depression Quest?
Zoe:I made it for a number of reasons. I was dealing with depression myself, and I needed to put all these feelings into something. Beyond that, I wanted to reach out to other people who are suffering with this and let them know they aren’t alone. Obviously we could never speak for everybody’s experience, but we wanted to give a 101-level of understanding of how this can manifest. It’s an interactive-fiction-esque game about, basically, the day to day realities of living with depression that tries to focus more on the internal, personal things that happen, rather than trying to make a metaphor for it.

What happened the first time you uploaded Depression Quest to Steam’s Greenlight service?
The first time I uploaded it to Greenlight I figured it would go mostly smoothly. Like, hopefully okay. We already had half a million players at that point and a bunch of awards. When it hit Greenlight, people were leaving foul comments there, and suddenly I started getting stuff sent to my email. “Oh I saw your game on Greenlight and I hope you kill yourself.” I guess somebody who thought they were really clever figured out my address and sent a very detailed rape threat to my house. That was when I decided to pull it off [Greenlight]. I just didn’t have the emotional time and effort to spend on it. Putting something on Greenlight, you have to manage this whole campaign, promotion. It’s exhausting when you also have people telling you that they want you to die.

Why in the world do you think these gamers felt the need to harass you?
I’m still not entirely sure. It’s always a pile of different factors. It’s not terribly surprising, sadly. This is not the first thing I’ve done on the internet. I’ve basically grown up with it. I know the game can be incendiary to some people, just by the fact that it is a game, and people think games are supposed to be certain other things, things that are fundamentally incompatible with depression. I think a lot of it boils down to: when people do this stuff, they don’t really think about the fact they’re going after an actual person. You become an abstract concept to them, not a real human. It’s not stuff you’d get face-to-face. In a bar you don’t get these things. Online, then it becomes easier for people to be awful. But a lot of us don’t have our games in storefronts. The internet is where we make our bread and butter. Especially Steam, it’s the biggest digital distribution platform there is.

When did you decide to try Greenlight again?
Part of it was just that, generally, I’m in a better place now. I thought since the game had gotten into IndieCade, people would respond to it a lot better. Willingly signing up for that experience again sucks, I hoped people had gotten it out of their system. Mostly, though, it came down to the fact that I talked to a lot of people that said that it helped them. I thought, honestly, I could take the hate if it meant the game could reach somebody who would get something out of it, feel less alone. That matters way more to me than the people who just spew hate ad hominem. It took me a long time to internalize that, despite getting a ton of fan letters, that the game helped people. It took me a long time because of my own bullshit. As soon as I accepted that it seemed silly to hold back.

Photo via.

What happened this time around?
Basically the same. People were really supportive for a while, but then someone sent me an email giving me a heads up that this anonymous message board was planning on raiding [harassment en masse] me. I found the thread and took screencaps. It was extremely out there. It was insane. I got some phone calls where I could tell someone was masturbating on the other end of the line. I got another call shortly after where a guy was just spewing as many rape-type threats as possible. I put my phone into airplane mode, posted a private Facebook message letting people know that they couldn’t reach me by phone. I knew if I talked about it, it would just intensify. It would do that thing that many things on the internet do, rapidly iterate out of control. Some fractal ball of crazy. I went along my business until a couple days after when another woman was engaged in some non-controversy [Dina Abou Karam]. Some friends of friends were debating on Twitter when one person said that games were not a sexist space, but I’m sitting there with a cell phone I can’t use because I’m getting harassed because of my gender. I just got sick of it. Everyone says don’t feed the trolls, but honestly, not talking about it isn’t helping. Allowing them to keep doing whatever they want to do, and say whatever they want doesn’t help a single fucking person.

It must feel like an odd spot to be in. Not like you didn’t deserve the sympathy, but it’s not the kind of attention you were hoping for.
I still feel really weird about it. I don’t want to be known for being harassed. I don’t want to be known for being a woman. It’s really frustrating. I’ve taught other women to make games, and they’re going to inherit this, this pile of shit. It could be them just as easily as it was me. I can either shirk the responsibility or I speak out and become this concept that people will want to attack and think that any of my success is just from backlash.

If we can’t hold much hope for the game community, is there something the services or larger entities can do to help? Anything Steam can do to improve things?
Absolutely. I wish Steam would let me turn the damn comments off. A percentage of my days are going in and cleaning that shit up. I used to let it go, but I had some people saying they wanted to go to the page and support my game, but the comments were saying depression wasn’t real or that I should kill myself, and that would hurt others in more fragile situations than I am. And of course you’d have people patently saying things that weren’t true on the page. I don’t want to give them a platform to lie on, that it is just a flash game, that it is a comedy game, it’s all false.

Even if it’s not the kind of publicity that you want, do you think if these issues were brought beyond the niche game press, that there would be more pressure for shit to clean up?
Definitely. I’m still trying to draw the proper conclusions from all this, but I am looking to speak to people who used to be like this, who used to harass, and have a conversation with them. Ask them how they grew out of it. There’s a wide variety of answers as to why people do this and when it stopped, but the one thing that seems pretty much universal is that they began realizing how this actually affects people. It kind of broke through the barrier, thinking of people as people. They said that hearing people talk about their experiences is what helped them realize it. So, as much as I hate the coverage personally, I think it’s really important. I’m cool with taking that hit.

Why do you think male nerds have been so viciously shitty towards women recently?
I think a lot of it is that things are actually changing. I think that, as stuff starts to roll forward, progress’ slow glacial movements towards something better, the people that feel insecure are going to get louder.

It’s still baffling that there are so many people that feel the mere existence of one kind of game will negate what’s currently popular. That Gone Home will kill God of War.
I don’t understand it at all. It can only help to have a variety of games, that’s how shit works. You don’t know what game is going to bring the next technical leap forward. Even if it’s a terrible game, it could have amazing ideas for other developers to seize, and take it somewhere better. A game like Gears of War could be improved by a game that has nothing to do with shooting people. That’s the iterative nature of games, they help everybody. And if you don’t like games like mine then just don’t fucking play them.


@KingFranknstein

The Syrian Peace Talks Look Like a Tragic Farce

$
0
0

Peace talks aiming to bring Syria's bloody civil war to a conclusion finally began yesterday in Switzerland, the land of peace and harmony. The conference officially starts Friday and will see delegates getting down to the seemingly impossible task of trying to thrash out a deal, but yesterday was the initial meeting of the "Geneva II" conference, where the participants got to let off some steam in lengthy speeches.

All things considered, the occasion didn't get off to the best start, with Syria's foreign minister using his speech to accuse some of the nations involved of having "Syrian blood on their hands" before calling the rebels "traitors." The US and the Syrian opposition used the opportunity to state that Bashar al-Assad had no legitimacy—which, shockingly, didn't go down too well with the Assad camp—while Syria's information minister argued with the UN secretary-general before shouting, "Assad will not leave! Assad will not leave!" at the assembled pack of reporters. So it doesn't look like the negotiations—the first time the opposition and the Syrian government have formally sat down together since the conflict began in 2011—will be particularly fruitful.

As the struggle in Syria reaches levels of complexity and horror that nobody could have imagined three years ago, the opportunity to get the major players around a table to thrash out a solution has been welcomed by many. An activist from Aleppo, who was part of the initial uprising and protest against the regime, said he supported the talks. "I think they should come with a political solution, no matter how much it costs," he told the Media Line. "For me, I will be happy to see peace again in Syria, even if al-Assad and the regime stays."

Last night the talks nearly became completely unstuck when the Syrian government's delegation was grounded in Greece after the Greek embargo on Syria prevented them from refueling their plane. A few swift calls from the UN and they were on their way again.

This tragi-comedy began 18 months ago when the United States, Russia, and a bunch of other countries got together to come up with some ideas about how to solve the conflict in Syria. They wrote some of those ideas down and released them as the Geneva Communiqué, the basis of which was a six-point plan working toward a cessation of violence and a transitional government. Neither representatives from Assad's regime nor the opposition Syrian National Council (SNC) were present at that meeting, however.

Since then, the international community has been trying to convince the warring parties to sit down and come up with a solution to the slaughter. Neither side was rushing to the negotiating table, but in November, after several postponements, the date was set as January 22. However, that clashed with a major watch fair in Geneva, which meant there wouldn't be enough hotels rooms for participants to stay in, so the peace talks were moved to Montreux. The scheduling mishap was a sign of things to come.

The Western-backed SNC were told that if they didn't come to the talks support from the UK and US would be withdrawn, leaving them with little choice but to reverse the rather fundamental part of their constitution that bans talks with the Syrian regime. Fifty-eight members of the SNC voted to attend the talks, while 14 voted not to and two refused to vote at all. The coalition was already in tatters after 44 members quit it earlier this month in protest what they called "random decision-making mechanisms" on the part of the SNC's leadership. (That group was persuaded to return to SNC talks, but declined to vote.)

A Kurdish YPG fighter in Syrian Kurdistan. Photo by Henry Langston

One group that didn't get an invite to the talks was Syria's Kurds, who make up around 15 percent of the population and have for the past seven months been fighting with jihadist opposition groups ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra in the country's northeast. In what looks like a pretty transparent "fuck you" to those who snubbed them, the Kurds declared autonomy from the Syrian state the day before talks were meant to start.

Within days of the SNC voting to attend the talks, they threatened to withdraw when UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon invited Iran to the party, announcing, "The Syrian Coalition announces that they will withdraw their attendance in Geneva II unless [UN Secretary-General] Ban Ki-moon retracts Iran's invitation." Iran has been financially and militarily backing the Assad regime, much to the ire of the rebel forces, whose backing from foreign powers has been patchy at best.

Ki-moon reassured the world that Tehran had made a commitment to be "positive and constructive." But when he sought Iran's reassurance that they saw the Geneva Communiqué as the starting point for negotiations, they refused to agree to the idea of a transitional government in Syria, so they were de-invited. The traditional way to deal with rejection is to act as aloof as possible, which is exactly what Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif decided to do, telling the ISNA news agency, "Iran was not too keen on attending in the first place."

That leaves the other key players in the Syrian crisis (the US, Russia, Qatar, and Kuwait), neighboring countries (Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq), and a smattering of others (Brazil and South Korea) at the negotiating table.

For their part, the Syrian regime has announced they will attend the talks, but stressed that only elections will see the removal of Assad as president. They have, however, expressed willingness to discuss a ceasefire agreement in Aleppo and the opening of humanitarian corridors into besieged areas. They're also excited to discuss the "fight against terrorism" within the country and will seek support from the international community to do so. Which might seem reasonable if Assad didn't apparently believe that everyone who opposes his regime is a "terrorist." (Oddly enough, he's allegedly been making deals with some of those terrorists.)

Weakening the regime's position is a report, released this week by a group of war crimes prosecutors, that claims that the government tortured, starved, and eventually executed 11,000 detainees. Evidence of the killings was smuggled out by a military police photographer who defected from the regime, and the relase of the report appears timed to influence the peace talks. The prosecutors say that "there is clear evidence, capable of being believed by a tribunal of fact in a court of law, of systematic torture and killing of detained persons by the agents of the Syrian government." This would amount to possible "crimes against humanity" and "war crimes," and make Assad's position that he continue governing Syria increasingly untenable.

The other side of the negotiating table has its own problems. The SNC has, over the last few months, lost the support of the major fighting groups inside Syria. The Islamic Front (IF), a coalition of the largest Islamist rebel groups, have withdrawn their support for the opposition's military arm, the Syrian Military Council (SMC). In fact, the IF went as far as to steal a warehouse full of SMC supplies near the Bab al-Hawa border crossing in northern Syria last month. Zahran Alloush, the head of the IF’s military committee, said on Twitter that he was asking others in the group "to endorse putting the participants of both parties in Geneva II on a wanted list."

In short, the West's preferred opposition group holds little real power in the country, doesn't speak for many people on the ground, and has little influence to enforce anything that might be agreed at the talks—and that's assuming that any agreement is reached, which is looking unlikely.

The US, the UK, and the UN are all united in their determination to forge ahead and "give peace a chance." UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, for instance, expressed his support for the aims of Geneva II. "The UN Secretary-General has made clear that the aim of the talks is to agree a political transition and an end to the conflict," he said.

ISIS fighters in northern Syria. Photo by Medyan Dairieh

Meanwhile, the IF and more moderate rebel forces are locked in fierce combat with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and other extremist groups who want to create an Islamic state that combines Iraq and Syria. The fighting between the groups has been so bad in the northern towns like Jarabulus and Manbij that thousands of Syrians have been pouring over the border into Turkey to seek refuge from the beheadings and wanton violence.

In the northern city of Raqqa, ISIS have retaken control of the city and ordered that music and cigarettes be banned, that women wear full Islamic dress, and that men must shut their businesses and attend prayers unless they want to be handed punishments in line with sharia law.

ISIS, their closest rebel colleagues, Jabhat al-Nusra, and the groups of foreign fighters and unaffiliated mujahideen won't be represented at Geneva II. Were a solution to be brokered in the coming days, how to actually enforce it with the militant jihadist element now endemic in northern Syria, would be a pretty tricky prospect.

There's a lot riding on Geneva II, and a successful agreement betwen the parties could prevent the deaths of more innocent Syrians. Unfortunately, unless something dramatic happens, it looks like these talks will be remembered as just another failed attempt to broker peace in the Middle East.

Decades After UN Peacekeepers' Murders, the Search for Justice Continues

$
0
0

South Lebanon Army founder Saad Haddad, left, with the author. Photo courtesy of Steve Hindy

I recently wrote a story for VICE reporting that special agents of US Homeland Security told me Mahmoud Bazzi, last known to be driving an ice cream truck in Detroit, had applied for US citizenship. Mahmoud had abducted me and a UN peacekeeping patrol officer 34 years ago. He executed and killed two other Irish UN soldiers, and tortured and killed a third. Homeland asked if I would be willing to testify at Mahmoud’s immigration hearing. I didn’t hesitate.

My story struck a nerve with several Irish Army veterans who were serving with the nine-nation United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon when the abduction and killings occurred April 18, 1980. It felt good to know that I wasn’t alone, and that others wanted Mahmoud brought to justice.

Former Irish Army soldier Robert Masterson phoned me and thanked me for writing the story. He also put me in touch with former Private John O’Mahony, the man who Mahmoud shot at least twice. Private O’Mahony was freed along with me and two UN officers.  We carried O’Mahony away from the bombed-out school where the killings took place. We hailed a taxi and took him to Tibnin, Lebanon, where the Irish battalion of the UN as based. 

I remember sitting in the back of that taxi, comforting Private O’Mahony who was bleeding from bullet wounds in the stomach, leg, and foot. He repeatedly asked about his comrades, Privates Derek Smallhorn, and Thomas Barrett, who were taken away by Mahmoud and other members of the so-called South Lebanon Army (SLA), an Israeli-supported militia occupying a 10-mile-deep occupation zone on the Israel-Lebanon border.

Several hours later, their bodies were found. They had been tortured, then executed.

After my story, Private O’Mahony called me to also express his gratitude. He told me how US investigators asked him to testify against Mahmoud, and he agreed that Mahmoud should pay for what he did to Smallhorn, Barrett, and their families.

Masterson wrote a letter to Irish Minister of State Paschal Donohoe asking that the Irish government to pursue all possible avenues to also bring Mahmoud to justice.

“I am aware previous Irish governments have tried to and failed to progress this matter to a successful conclusion for all involved,” he wrote. “This atrocity and war crime has never been forgotten by either the families of the men and women who served this country in the defense forces. It remains an unbelievable situation that a known criminal can escape justice in a country renowned for its vigor in hunting down and prosecuting anyone who perpetrate a crime against US citizens or interests.”

Masterson told me he was also writing to the Minister of Defense, Alan Shatter, and other high officials.

In 2000, Irish Television did a special on the 20th anniversary of the killings. The producers tracked down Mahmoud to his home in Detroit and confronted him about the incident. He denied killing the Irishmen and said he had been forced to boast about the killings in the Lebanese media at the time. He claimed rebel Lebanese Army Major Saad Haddad, leader of the SLA, threated to kill him if he did not take responsibility for the killings.

I had repeatedly phoned Mahmoud’s home in Detroit. The woman who answered hung up without responding to questions. I called my contact at Homeland Security, Special Agent Perry Kao, and he was not available. After that television report, I testified to US Department of Justice investigators about the killings, but no action was taken against Mahmoud.

Mahmoud’s fate still remains unclear. No date has been set for Mahmoud’s immigration hearing. Kao said there was evidence that Mahmoud had entered the United States illegally, with false papers. If found guilty and denied citizenship, he could be deported, probably to Lebanon. Neither the US nor Ireland has an extradition treaty with Lebanon. Given the chaotic state of affairs in Lebanon today, it seems unlikely that Mahmoud could face justice there. 

Israel invaded south Lebanon in 1978 to drive out Palestine Liberation Organization forces. When the Israelis withdrew, the United Nations established the Interim Force to serve as a barrier between remaining PLO forces and Israel. Israel opposed the UN plan and instead armed and paid a private militia to patrol a ten-mile-deep zone in Lebanon. The militia was known as the South Lebanon Army. The SLA was allied with the rightwing Christian Phalange Party, an ally of Israel. Haddad was a Christian.

Mahmoud, a Shiite Muslim, was a member of the South Lebanon Army. In early April 1980, a young SLA militiaman was killed in a clash with the Irish battalion of the UN force. An Irish solider, Private Stephen Griffin, also was killed. Mahmoud was the brother of the young militiaman.

After the death of the militiaman, Haddad demanded the UN pay $10,000 blood money or turn over the bodies of two Irishmen to avenge the death of the militiaman. Mahmoud subsequently took the law into his own hands. I was a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press at the time and happened to be with the Irishmen when the abduction occurred.

Who knows what sort of reception Mahmoud might receive in Lebanon. The Bazzi family is a large one in south Lebanon; but the whole southern region is now controlled by Hezbollah, an enemy of the right-wing Phalange Party and Israel. 

 

 

One Man's Plan to Live on an Iceberg Until It Melts

$
0
0
One Man's Plan to Live on an Iceberg Until It Melts

Inside the Crumbling Walls of Kabul's Abandoned Palace

$
0
0

“I am very, very sorry,” my translator Mr. Mobin informed me, slowly shaking his head, “but if you are not Muslim, you will burn in hell forever. Many times I cry in the night about this.”

I listened to Mobin as Kabul careened past my window: burqas, turbans, minarets, hanging meat, birds in cages, blacksmiths at their forges. The chaos parted reluctantly and only at the brash insistence of our taxi’s speeding prow. We were headed to Darul Aman Palace. The neoclassical structure floated like a mirage atop a hill on the outskirts of the city. With a name meaning “Abode of Peace,” Darul Aman had been shelled nearly out of existence during the last 30 years of war.

“Study the Qur'an, my brother,” Mobin urged, “and I will be your tour guide in paradise!”

“What is paradise like?” I asked.

“In paradise, there are fruits, like the fruits on earth, but they taste even better. And God gives you beautiful women, and they will never fight with you. Also, everyone gets a building made of precious things like diamonds, emeralds, and lapis.”

Mobin could have been describing the once-lavish Darul Aman in its heyday—an earthly attempt at heavenly perfection. Built in the early 1920s by King Amanullah Khan, the palace was intended as a symbol of Afghanistan’s modernization. That purpose was short-lived. The king was forced from power by religious zealots at the end of the decade, and all of his liberal reforms were rescinded.

Over the coming years, Darul Aman would serve as a medical school, a raisin warehouse, a refugee camp, and various government ministries until Afghanistan’s civil war made it an important strategic position. As an improvised fortress, it was taken and retaken repeatedly by opposing forces.

Now, a small unit of the Afghan National Army occupies Darul Aman. We pulled up to the barbed wire fence surrounding the palace, got out, and shut our doors quietly. The soldiers were lounging under a portico drinking tea, their assault rifles leaning rakishly against the pillars. We smiled and waved casually. They waved back.

At Mobin’s suggestion, I had brought a gift. The men were in need of a volleyball. Placing my hand over my heart, I supplied them with one. Abdil, the unit commander smiled broadly from behind his aviators with a Ray-Ban sticker still boldly obscuring a lens. “Very good,” he said, waving us on.

We stepped through a shell-hole into the building, letting our eyes adjust to the darkness before moving on. There was unexploded ordnance scattered among the rubble—one of the reasons why the ANA guards lived in separate barracks outside.

The walls were covered in graffiti: Qur'anic verses, names of fallen comrades, a monkey smoking a cigarette. In the oval chamber once intended to be Afghanistan’s parliament, someone had spray-painted a picture of a tank with an upraised hand jutting from the turret. It was labeled, “Hi-5 tANK.” In another room someone wrote, “As long as there is battle, we will be steadfast.” A second writer countered, “You will battle as long as you are paid.”

We ascended a spiral staircase as Mobin resumed his evangelizing. “My brother,” he appealed, “the Qur'an says that one day the sun will die. I saw on the internet that this is true. One day the sun will finish its energy. How could Mohammad know that? Only God could know.” His words echoed through the halls.

We saw dark figures in the corridor: a young man carrying a suitcase, an old bearded man leading a boy by the hand, and finally the squat Abdil and his lanky underling Abdul, who had come to check up on us.

After requesting that we pose for photographs, the two soldiers made beckoning gestures. We followed them to a two-story ladder that led up to the roof. The metal had been twisted and one of the vertical legs severed by the force of an explosion. Abdil and Abdul began to climb without a second thought. I followed close behind. Mobin shook his head and remained below.

“It is dangerous,” he warned.

“Insha’Allah,” I replied, using a phrase he often uttered. Whatever happens is God’s will.

From the roof, all of Kabul lay at our feet. We stood under a suspended sheet of corrugated aluminum. It had been peppered by so much shrapnel that it looked like a sky full of stars. We stepped to the edge of a gaping hole and looked down through all three floors of the palace to a large crater punched into the earth. An American warhead had done this in a battle against the Taliban early in the war.

The soldiers were playful—an Afghan version of Laurel and Hardy—pretending, with raucous laughter, to jump from the roof, to push each other off, and (with flapping arms) to fly away. Abdil pulled out his keffiyeh and draped it over Abdul’s head like a shawl. “My darling!” he exclaimed in proud English, wrapping his arm around the man to fondle an imaginary breast.

The men hoisted themselves even higher, through a window, and up the iron skeleton of what had once been a dome of glass, every shard of it now long gone. At the summit, Abdul triumphantly unfurled the Afghan flag he wore around his neck. We all watched it billow in the wind. Then, slowly we descended, back to the patient Mobin.

As the sun began to dim, my translator began to make vague warnings about kidnappers. He started us on our way back to the car. As we took the stairs down we passed a young man and woman coming up. The couple stared at their shuffling feet, willing themselves invisible.

“Who let them in?” Abdul asked his superior.

Abdil puckered his lips and made a loud kissing sound. “Let them enjoy,” he chuckled. 

Mobin, hearing this, drifted back until we were shoulder to shoulder. “Listen, my brother,” he whispered, turning his lips to my ear, “Allah says this world is like two children playing. It is a game. Please believe what I say. The next world is not a game.”

(Photographs by Roc Morin)

Roc’s new book, And, was released recently. You can find more information on his website.

Denmark’s Controversial Teenage Muslim Superstar Poet

$
0
0

Photo by Morten Holtum (Courtesy of Gyldendal)

Yahya Hassan is an 18-year-old Muslim Palestinian immigrant to Denmark who has become a social critic, celebrity writer, and general shit-stirrer—all thanks to a slim volume of poetry. Since the release of his self-titled debut collection in October, he’s been all over the Danish media, at least in part due to his subject matter. His poetry, written in all caps in Danish, is full of rage directed at his parents’ generation, a group of Muslims he accuses of hypocrisy and abandoning their children. He’s penned lines like:

YOU YOU’RE A MUSLIM? / YOU YOU DON’T KNOW/ IF YOU WANT HALAL OR HARAM / YOU YOU KNOW YOU WANT HARAM / BUT YOU YOU PRETEND YOU WANT HALAL / YOU YOU DON’T WANT PIG / MAY ALLAH REWARD YOU FOR YOUR FOOD HABITS.

Some of his poetry documents an abusive childhood; Yahya grew up in a poor neighborhood of Aarhus, and flirted with crime from an early age. He blames much of that on his mother and father. “As soon as our parents landed in Copenhagen airport it felt as if their role as parents was coming to an end,” Yahya told the Danish newspaper Politiken in the interview, published on October 5, that turned him into a teenage social commentator.

He’s been a frequent guest on television programs where he debates other young Muslims, and his willingness to bluntly criticize them in front of outsiders has earned him many accolades from the media. Yahya Hassan sold 11,000 copies in the first 24 hours it was available, and over 100,000 have been printed total, making it the most popular Danish poetry publication of all time.

His fellow Muslims, however, have a lot less affection for Yahya than Danish society. “To many young Muslims, Islam is an identity marker, like belonging to a subculture, such as punk,” said Helle Lykke Nielsen, a PhD in Middle Eastern studies and an expert in integration at the University of Southern Denmark. “They feel they’ve had their identities attacked by Yahya Hassan’s poetry.”

Yahya has been literally attacked by his detractors. On November 18, the poet was assaulted by a radical Muslim who had previously been convicted of terrorism under Danish law. Later that month he did a reading in Vollsmose, a poverty-stricken suburb of Odense that’s home to many Muslim immigrants. The authorities had so many concerns about the event they gave Yahya bodyguards and made all of Odense a no-fly zone.

Helle sees Yahya’s controversial poems as a positive development—the backlash, he thinks, is just a consequence of Muslim immigrants joining a society where people speak freely about their religions and criticize others in the mass media. “Danish Muslims will have to get used to the fact that Islam is up for debate,” he said. “It’s a step toward better integration, where we can discuss Islam and religion in general without prejudice.”

This Week in Racism: Sarah Palin Complains About "the Race Card" and a Black Woman Was Used as a Chair

$
0
0

Welcome to another edition of This Week in Racism. I’ll be ranking news stories on a scale of 1 to RACIST, with “1” being the least racist and “RACIST” being the most racist.

-A common complaint I, and others who comment on race issues, receive is that we are "race baiting," i.e., using racial tension to further a political agenda. This can be a very effective rhetorical tactic, because if accusation of race baiting can sway perceptions, it ultimately renders one party's feelings irrelevant. The wrinkle in all of that is that it means that anyone who discusses race has some sort of discernible agenda. The only thing I'm after is to tell you what happened, hopefully make you laugh about it, and foster discussion. I don't carry water for any politician, political party, or cause (unless you count "asking people to not be shitty to each other" as a cause). That doesn't stop folks like Sarah Palin from leveling the charge of "playing the race card" on anyone they don't agree with.

Sarah Palin, like me and countless other media types, makes a living as a cultural commentator. It's in her best interest to get the largest number of people talking about her opinions as possible. So, how could she help herself when given the opportunity to use Martin Luther King Day to attack a political rival? That's like asking Michael Douglas to not give a creepy awards acceptance speech. It's impossible. Palin didn't specify when Barack Obama played the race card in her Facebook post, but my best guess is that she was referring to a statement Obama made which was published by the New Yorker where he said that racial animosity plays a role in his lowered approval ratings.

My first reaction to this was, Whoa, Barry, quit playing the race card, dude, because it sounded like he was passing the buck for his administration's many legitimate failures: the NSA spying scandal, the proliferation of drone warfare, and his botching of the health care marketplace rollout. Anyone giving him a straight pass for these transgressions isn't paying attention. Still, in that very same New Yorker story, Obama tempers his statement by rightly pointing out that much of his remaining support stems from voters being overly enamored of the fact that he's our first black president. Barack Obama is to blame for many things, but being the first person of color to be elected to America's highest political office is not one of them. He can't stop people from loving him because of something that is totally out of his control. He also can't stop them from hating him. He's just as stuck with his race—and the social implications of his race—as a white person who others judge solely on their skin color. 5

-The idea that we're all going to magically become colorblind one day is a fantasy, even if that fantasy is perpetuated by the memory of Dr. King's famous dream. A prime example of this is Dasha Zhukova, girlfriend of Russian oil baron and Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich. Dasha posed for a photo in a European fashion blog called Buro 24/7 on a black female model who was actually the chair itself. The image (seen at the top of this article) is a play off of a sculpture made by English pop artist Allen Jones. The woman in Jones's sculpture was white, and Jones was known for his fascination with sado-masochist imagery. Jones has seen the photo and called it "tacky and distasteful" according to BBC World News. Buro 24/7's editorial team and Dasha have since apologized and stated they are against racism. This might shock some of you, but I believe them. I also don't think Dasha Zhukova is racist. The problem is that for every person who "doesn't see race," there is another person who does. The chances of an image of a rich white woman sitting on a nude black woman evoking visions of historical racial bondage are pretty high. If Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman can't even give an obnoxious post-game interview without being called a nigger, then it's asinine to claim that racism doesn't exist.

Commentators like Sarah Palin are never going to get what they want, and Barack Obama is never going to be judged solely on his record, because we're all trapped living in the real world. In a world where slavery happened, apartheid happened, the Holocaust happened, the internment of Japanese-Americans happened, and the institutional mistreatment of Native Americans happened. We can try to do what we can to make things better, treat others equally, and fight back against negative stereotypes. That won't change the fact that race makes people feel stuff. Sometimes, that stuff is pride, like pride over a world leader that looks like you. Sometimes, that stuff is shame when someone who looks like you is being used as an object, either literally or metaphorically. The only thing that can be done now is for people to think about what their actions mean, and how those actions will be perceived. It sounds simple, but don't ever expect the limitless human capacity. 7

 

-Speaking of angry black people, have you seen this guy, Joshua Black? Mr. Black is running for a seat in the Florida House of Representatives and recently tweeted that Obama is a "traitor" and should be hanged. He's not really forthcoming with specific acts of treason that Obama committed, but maybe he should look up the legal definition of the term, because I'm fairly certain threatening the life of a sitting head of state is one of those things that is treason. The Secret Service is currently investigating Mr. Black, which adds fuel to my "probably not a great idea to threaten the president" theory. 

Inciting a mob to go out and hang someone based on a biased interpretation of the law was pretty common in the 20th century. Joshua Black should probably be aware of the implications of demanding a black public figure be hanged. If you feel the itch to crawl down the mangy rabbit hole that is Black's inflammatory Twitter account, you'll find a classic defense of his actions. He cites the critics of President Bush who burned Dubya's effigy. That was wrong, and so is this.

It's completely irresponsible to incite violence toward a political figure from either party (or anyone for that matter), and it's doubly irresponsible when there are plenty of Americans who would love to end Obama's life for his policies—and worse yet, for the color of his skin. The maniacs who love to throw around words like "treason" with impunity are the same ones who, like Sarah Palin, think that people are too free with accusations of racism. If you think calling someone a racist is bad, try telling them they betrayed the nation they swore to protect and should be killed. One is far more damaging to the public discourse than the other. 5

The Most Racist Tweets of the Week:

 

Cry-Baby of the Week

$
0
0

It's time, once again, to despair at some idiots who don't know how to handle the world:

Cry-Baby #1: Leanda Probert

screencap via

The incident: A black woman was sent a computer-generated password that said "charcoal shade."

The appropriate response: Maybe some initial offense that disappears once you discovered the password was computer-generated.

The actual response: The woman took her story to the local paper and demanded an apology.

Two years ago, 31-year-old Leanda Preston was diagnosed with fibromyalgia, a condition that causes full-body pain and tiredness.

Last week, she received a letter asking her to arrange an appointment with an NHS pain management clinic in Somerset, England. The letter contained a computer-generated password for her to use on the hospital website when making the appointment. The password was "charcoal shade."

An outraged Leanda spoke to someone from the NHS, who told her the password was made up of randomly selected words.

Leanda took her story to her local paper, the The Weston Mercury. Speaking to the paper, she said she was "very taken aback and highly offended" when opening the letter. She said that, initially, she felt the NHS was "laughing" and "making fun."

"The letter must have been put in an envelope by someone, why did they not proof read it and realize it could be offensive?" she said.

For some reason, a spokesman for NHS North Somerset felt the need to apologize for this. In a statement he said, "North Somerset CCG would like to apologize for any offence that the password contained within the letter may have cause." Adding, "The password was generated automatically by the central choose and book system with the words themselves randomly selected by an electronic database."

Leanda says she is yet to receive an apology personally. 

Cry-Baby #2: Sheboygan Falls High School


screencap via

The incident: A high school basketball player threw up the "three-point" hand sign in a photo.

The appropriate response: Nothing.

The actual response: Police were called and the boy was suspended from his basketball team. 

Earlier this month, the Sheboygan Falls News ran a story about Jordan, Jamal, and Juwaun Jackson, three basketball playing brothers at Sheboygan Falls High School in Wisconsin. The paper took a photo of the three boys (which you can see above) to accompany the article. In the photo two of the boys are gesturing with their hands.

Jordan, the boy on the left of the photo, explained the gestures to TMJ News. "When you make a three [point shot] everyone does this sign," he said. "Probably you've seen LeBron James do it or someone." He explained that his younger brother's hand sign was just him "pointing at the camera."

According to the school, parents got in touch to complain that the boys were doing what "looked like gang symbols." So the school called the police (!!!) to report it; I feel at this point it's worth noting that the town of Sheboygan Falls is 95 percent white.

The local police investigated the photo (!!!) and were "able to confirm that the sign was indeed a gang sign." However, police chief Steve Riffel acknowledged that the boys "posed no threat to the community."

This wasn't enough to stop the boys being punished, and both Jordan and Jamal were suspended from the school's basketball team. They missed one game, but had their suspension lifted after complaints. 

The local chapter of the ACLU has announced that they are investigating the incident. 

Who here is the bigger cry-baby? Let us know in this poll right here:

Previously: A guy who tried to eat someone's heart during a chess game Vs. A guy who shot some people for texting in a movie theater

Winner: The text shooter!!!

@JLCT

The VICE Podcast - What's Next in the Snowden Saga?

$
0
0

 

This week on the VICE podcast, Reihan Salam moderates a debate regarding the former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who leaked classified NSA documents to journalists about the NSA surveillance programs, the first of which were revealed last June in the Guardian.

The guests today are Fred Kaplan, "War Stories" columnist for Slate and Edward R. Murrow press fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project, who also serves as Snowden's chief legal advisor.

Today's discussion was inspired by Kaplan's article "Why Snowden Won't (and Shouldn't) Get Clemency" on Slate.

'Neil Young Lies' Is Pro-Oil Propaganda at its Worst

$
0
0

The end result of big oil money versus anti-tar sands activism. 

Earlier this week, an attack site called Neil Young Lies popped up in my Facebook feed, and I was immediately interested in what appeared to be an organized attempt to discredit Neil’s attention-grabbing, anti-tar sands activism. Mr. Young is an aging rocker who is the first to admit he is “not an expert” on energy extraction, but he has become a representative for an increasingly agitated aboriginal population in Canada.

The central issue for the First Nations people in this country appears to be the seemingly reckless development from the oil and gas industry that is threatening their cultural right to maintain a subsistence diet—meaning they have a legal right to hunt, trap, and fish. Any action that threatens this right, by way of damaging the ecosystem, is against Canadian law according to Treaties 6, 7, and 8; which is why, of course, Neil Young’s tour is called “Honour the Treaties.”

If you were to visit and read the skewed literature over at Neil Young Lies, however, you wouldn’t think that protecting legislation written to preserve First Nations culture was Neil Young’s mandate whatsoever. One of the sections on the site, “Who Paid for Neil Young to Lie?” alleges that Neil Young’s entire tour and the surrounding campaign has been paid for—and is being controlled by—an environmental NGO in San Francisco called the Tides Foundation (Tides did not respond in time to comment before publication of this article). Further, the site claims that the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN), the reserve that is geographically closest to Fort McMurray, is in the Tides Foundation’s pocket as well.

Neil Young Lies is supported by Ethical Oil, a pro-Canadian oil, anti-“conflict oil,” advocacy group funded by oil companies and founded by Alykhan Velshi, an advisor to Stephen Harper. Ezra Levant, Sun News’ most controversial pundit, is their chairman and defacto media spokesman—in fact, the group itself is named after Ezra’s best selling book from 2010.  Writing for the Tyee in 2011, Andrew Nikiforuk criticized the book for having five crucial falsehoods. Andrew was also quick to point out that Ezra is a “convicted libeler” and “former tobacco lobbyist.”

The difference between so-called “ethical oil” and “conflict oil,” according to Ethical Oil and its supporters, is described on their website: “Countries that produce Ethical Oil uphold human rights and have high environmental standards. They ensure economic justice and promote peace. By contrast, Conflict Oil countries oppress their citizens and operate in secret with no accountability to voters, the press, or independent judiciaries.”

Ethical Oil is already infamous for running attack ads against liberal foes such as the NDP, and for “rebranding” the oil sands on Oprah’s TV network, with a campaign that points out the massive injustices as Saudi Arabia as if to say, “at least we’re not murdering bloggers in the street, so buy our oil.” This seems to be a major sticking point for the Ethical Oil people, as you can see from the video I’ve embedded below. It’s messaging like this that promotes a myopically patriotic, xenophobic, and racist attitude which generalizes the Middle East as a land of barbarians.

The sunny oil sands commercial turned Saudi attack ad from Ethical Oil.

After learning about the Ethical Oil group, I got in touch with Ezra Levant, who called me yesterday morning to talk about his support for the Canadian oil industry and his dismissal of Neil Young’s activism. He told me the Neil Young Lies site is “amazing” and “great” because it’s “fighting lies with facts.”

It’s certainly true that Neil Young made a few factual errors when he was out on the press circuit talking about the tar sands. Everyone and their mom has already heard his Hiroshima comparison which is, granted, on the extreme side—even though a Nagasaki survivor has said on the record that Fort McMurray looks “much more scary, ugly, and disturbing than photos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki”—but it was also ridiculous for Stephen Harper to make a symbolic pronouncement that Fort McMurray would be an undertaking so epic it would rival the pyramids or the Great Wall of China. It’s clear that both sides of this debate are prone to hyperbole.

Neil Young Lies attempts to break down the so-called falsehoods that Neil Young has spread throughout the media. For example, in response to Neil’s assertion that “there is no reclamation” of oil sands sites, Ethical Oil and Neil Young Lies insist that some of the oil sands mines are reclaimed after the land is used. And they’re right. Neil was wrong to say there is no reclamation, but the minute amount of reclamation that does occur is nothing to celebrate.

Photo via.

This graph from the government of Alberta’s own website shows how much of the oil sands is “disturbed” and how little of the land is “certified reclaimed” or in the process of being reclaimed. The Pembina Institute, an environmental protection organization with members across Canada, has a breakdown of the reclamation process that points out: “Only 0.15% of the area disturbed by oilsands mining is certified as reclaimed by the provincial government.” So while Neil Young may have overstated the lack of reclamation in Alberta, he wasn’t far off; and to call him a liar for such a slip-up to make it seem as if he is pushing a hidden agenda, rather than fumbling on a few facts. This suggests that Ethical Oil is not seeing the forest for the oil-soaked trees.

The site also points out that Neil was wrong about Canada selling oil to China (which is technically true, although Harper did allow one of Canada’s oil corporations to be bought out by a state-owned Chinese corporation). It also jumps on Neil for claiming Fort McMurray smells like gas and that cancer rates are exploding in the region.

I’ve never been to Fort McMurray—but I’ve been to Sarnia’s Chemical Valley—and as far as air quality goes, it was at times unbearable and nearly unbreatheable; yet everyone who was willing to talk to me from government or industry told me that the air was just fine, and pointed to government air quality metrics that didn’t dissuade me from smelling a thick, oily gas smell in the region; never mind the World Health Organization’s assertion that Sarnia has the worst air in all of Canada.

As for the cancer rates Neil pointed out, these things are often hard to verify—because the necessary studies oftentimes aren’t done to prove or disprove anyone—which leaves such claims in a state of reasonable doubt. All that’s left is anecdotal evidence for the community to stake their claim. For example, a rare case of bile duct cancer that only occurs in “one of every 100,000 to 200,000 people” has appeared three times in Fort Chipewyan, a First Nations community in Alberta with a population of 1,100.

Meanwhile, Ezra told me “Neil Young is full of shit” because he “rides in a private jet” and the Calgary Herald, a PostMedia newspaper, has said “Neil Young puts comfort ahead of convictions” and “Neil Young’s carbon footprint too big to ignore.” It’s certainly true that his private jet rides result in a larger-than-average carbon footprint, and this makes him an easy target for defenders of the Alberta Oil Sands. Does that lifestyle, however, make all of his statements moot? I don’t think so.

Ezra also harped on a $55,000 deposit made from the Tides Foundation to the ACFN; this deposit, he insists, is indicative of Neil Young and the ACFN “taking money from a lobby group from San Francisco to shit on Canada.” He implied that Chief Alan Adam, along with the communications coordinator of the ACFN, Eriel Deranger, were on the payroll of the lobby group. Ezra’s theory is echoed on this page of the Neil Young Lies website.

I called Eriel Deranger yesterday to ask her about Ezra, Sun Media, Ethical Oil, and Neil Young Lies’ claim that she is in the pocket of an environmental lobby group from San Francisco. When I first asked her for a reaction, she laughed, then regained her composure, and we discussed the issues.

“I’m not going to deny that I have a relationship with many of the folks associated with the Tides Foundation, but they absolutely don’t have any control over us… I think that the group would like to, but they don’t.”

Eriel explained to me that the ACFN is one of the few in Canada that does not accept money from the federal government (as of the beginning of 2013, they were given $2.6 million in 2012), so they have to look for funding elsewhere. The $55,000 that Ezra Levant is treating as the smoking gun for his theory that some shadowy San Francisco based environmentalists are controlling Neil Young—according to Eriel—was money granted to the ACFN from Tides so Eriel and her organization could develop an education and communications campaign, to spread their philosophy and develop workshops in the community.

Eriel told me one of the principle beliefs of the ACFN is a “respect for land, water, and culture.” Adding: “That vision drives our position on the oil sands. We’re not anti development. We’ve said it 1000 times and we’ll say it 1000 times more. We want to see progress and opportunities for our members that respect land, water, and culture. And right now what’s happening in Alberta’s oil sands is not meeting the mission and vision of our nation. What’s happening is we’re seeing land that is basically considered a casualty of the development. We’re seeing water sources that are being appropriated for industrial development and the priority has been given to them, which is affecting our ability to access our land.”

As far as Neil Young’s carbon footprint goes, Eriel and I discussed the “sparring” as the Huffington Post put it, between the Herald, Ezra, and Neil Young over Neil’s idling buses that apparently ran off bio-diesel generators. Eriel has a much different take on why Neil brought his buses; “He had his tour bus because his son came with him, and his son has cerebral palsy. He needed a place to lie down and rest. That’s the only reason he brought his tour bus.” While this doesn’t exactly explain having more than one bus—Ezra and the Herald say Neil had five—the comfort of Neil Young’s son, I’m sure, is a top priority.

While the Ethical Oil people insist that Canada is “ethical” because our environmental protections are respectable and effective, Eriel pointed me to a study conducted by Timothy Lee, an Albertan researcher, and Dr. Kevin Timoney, that found out of 9,000 environmental incidents in the oil sands region between 1996-2009 only 37 of them were met with enforcement from the Albertan government. When it was released, “a senior provincial government scientist publicly accused [Timothy and Kevin] of deliberately manipulating and even lying about data in a critical report on the oil sands.” That government scientist was forced to apologize.

It’s for gross, widespread violations like this that Eriel, Neil Young, and others insist the federal government and the oil industry are breaking the law when it comes to their degradation of the environment. It is also arguably unconstitutional, according to section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act that was written to protect Aboriginal rights, particularly when it comes to their subsistence diet.

According to Eriel: “It’s time that industry and government take a look at First Nations rights and titles [or else they] will be extinguished with these projects and [the government and industry] will be complicit. This is going to lead to serious financial risks to these projects. Our nation is just one nation; there are many nations in the area that are going to start standing up. You’re seeing issues in Cold Lake, Beaver Lake… First Nations rights are going to get in the way and that is going to drive up the cost of oil. If the government is actually looking into the interests of the public they would sort this out with the First Nations now, rather than continue to satisfy industry.”

After speaking to Eriel Deranger, I called up Amanda Achtman, who is listed on the Neil Young Lies site as the point of contact for any comment. I asked her if she thought the cause of protecting the rights of Aboriginals, as it is written in Canadian law, was a valid cause; and whether she considered that to be one of Neil Young’s lies. Amanda told me: “Environmental degradation is not something that only affects aboriginals, it affects everyone, so that’s a separate and distinct issue from treaties that seem to protect a certain demographic. The environment is relevant to everyone… These treaties… we need to read them. People raising the treaties need to be a little more precise. It has not been clearly articulated.”

I pointed out that there are several instances of gross environmental abuse in the oil sands region that seem to fit the bill of environmental degradation, but she insisted that these terms were too subjective.

“What is the standard of degradation? Aboriginals who first discovered bitumen and used it as canoe sealant...was that degradation? Were they degrading the environment or not? What constitutes environmental harm? Do we not all realize that by living and participating in the world the environment will be influenced, but so be it. The earth is for humans, not the other way around. Yes we have a responsibility to steward it… the environment can’t be responsible to us.”

Amanda refers to Neil Young Lies as a grassroots campaign, but to me, that term rings too true to the American Tea Party, which has been confirmed to be a “grassroots” construct of the billionaire Koch Brothers and Big Tobacco. There is even some speculation that the Koch Foundation has donated to Ethical Oil, which Ezra has vehemently denied, though he thinks the Koch Foundation is “wonderful” and interned for them in the summer of 1994. While the Ethical Oil organization is tight-lipped about its donors, they do not deny their cause is funded by, “companies… working to produce Ethical Oil.”

When I asked who else was helping to put the site together, that is who writes the copy that fills the blogs, or writes the scripts for the Neil Young Lies radio ads that Ethical Oil is running in Edmonton, Calgary, and Fort McMurray, Amanda told me: “We have a team of researchers and writers, it’s small, but we work together on it.”

After asking Amanda if any of those people work in the oil industry, she responded: “I’m not commenting on these aspects. I don’t have this information.”

 

@patrickmcguire

How Ukrainian Authorities Are Using Smartphones as Weapons Against Protesters

$
0
0
How Ukrainian Authorities Are Using Smartphones as Weapons Against Protesters

Therapy with Steve Girard, AKA Stevie Eats Worms

$
0
0

I hate to keep coming back to this, but after I gargled my piss on the internet I received a lot of heartfelt missives from urine enthusiasts the world over. One very intrusive fan even searched my DNS registration and sent me a text with my father’s name and address, warning me to be careful. That incident in particular made me very paranoid that someone was going to break into my apartment and cut my head off on webcam. Months later, the same guy sent me a video entitled “Wawd Ahp,” saying he thought I would be “into” it. It is below and NSFW.

I watched the video and enjoyed it greatly because it made me feel less afraid and insane. So I decided to interview its creator, Steve, partly as a form of solace from real life, and also because anyone who makes a video of themselves fucking their own decapitated head is probably pretty cool. Here is what happened.

VICE: I want to talk about masochism.
Steve: What?

I don’t want to intellectualize your video too much because that generally makes things shitty, but I’ve never seen anything like what you did. Maybe I just don’t watch enough things...
I mean, I’m not a rapper but I did want to make a movie, and I do want to make a movie, and I just wanted to be honest about it. “Cut your head off.” It’s how the creative process felt. It was stressful, and I had to be abusive with myself in order to get it done.

That’s meta. May I ask if you were thinking of Riff Raff at all?
Riff Raff and Alien from Spring Breakers came out after I had put in cornrows and shot it. Whatever. White guys with cornrows—that’s a thing.

It’s totally a thing. It exists.
It’s very real.  

Do you watch lots of videos of people getting their heads cut off in real life?
No. You mean like those Mexican drug lord ads?  No, I don’t watch any of those. When it’s real it’s horrible.

It’s a huge bummer.
Yeah... I don’t get a boner at all when I see real violence.

I said “bummer.”
Oh, "bummer.” Oops. I get a bummer-boner. An inverted boner.

I thought your video was cathartic. It was like a nice little hug for anyone who’s seen a snuff film.
Do you watch snuff videos?

No.
I could see you being a big snuff freak. Just based off of your pee gargling article, where you gargle your own pee.

Ah, yes, that fine piece of journalism.
That’s pretty hardcore. Is it real?

It is real. People thought it was apple juice and I was like, “Well, shit, it should have been.”
I could tell that you were struggling there, trying to get it down.

Steve, what is your number one fear, or fears?
Oh man. My number one fear is dying alone. Or humiliation. Like in public. You know in 8 Mile where he forgets all of his lyrics? That sounds like the worst thing in the world. Just humiliating yourself in front of people who are funnier than you, or people who you’re trying to impress.

That’s crazy—it seems like you deal with that inherently in your work.
Well, we all have to deal with that.

That’s true. Like every day. Moment to moment…
I have a theory that if you do stuff that is possibly humiliating all of the time, then that sort of diffuses the rest of your day-to-day humiliation potential.

Maybe that’s why I related to you fucking your own head so much.
Yeah. Do you feel that way?

Yeah. Hence the pee gargling.
When you gargled your pee and wrote about it were people like, “What the fuck, I’m so embarrassed for you.” Stuff like that?

Yeah, but also a lot of people reached out to me who seemed like they were repressing their own desires out of a fear of being humiliated. I guess in writing it I was just like, Hey, come talk about it with me.
Right. People were attracted to that.

Yeah, that’s why I was wondering what kind of people have been reaching out to you.
Just freaks like you, Kara.

God dammit.
Some people on Facebook have said, “Good job.” And then you. And that’s it.

Did it get banned?
No. Well, Vimeo banned it for a day but I wrote them a thing and they apologized. They must have a system where a bot automatically takes it down after it’s been flagged so many times.

So people were flagging it.
Well, yeah, because enough people on Gizmodo, who also wrote a thing about it, were like, “Ramreuhrufaramfbredo.” It was only that one day. I went insane. I was really upset. [mocking himself] I was really upset.

Do you actually have a sister named Danielle?
Yeah, that’s my older sister. She’s a writer. She writes murder mystery novels and she spends a lot of time by herself, writing, and going crazy and abusing herself, mentally. So that’s why it was for her. Because she can relate to an abusive creative process.

That’s incredible. That’s not what I was expecting at all. Everyone I showed it to wondered if she was real. 
Yeah. Someone on Gizmodo said, “I think she would have rather got an Amazon gift card instead.” But she is real. And I love her. And I wanted her to have—whatever, words are coming out of my mouth.  

That is actually really sweet. You said in an email you were working on a movie.
Yeah, I’m making a feature-length called Ski Bandits. It’s a love story and it’s funny, and it’s psychedelic, and it’s aggressive, and I haven’t even written it yet, so how dare I say anything.

When do you think? 2017?
Oh man, hopefully before then. That seems really far away from now. I’ll be 30. I have a lot of talented friends who I really want to show off.

Last night “Wawd Ahp” won the Jury Award for Anarchy at the Slamdance Film Festival in Park City, Utah. It's nice to know films where people fuck their own decapitated heads in a bathtub can find an audience in 2014. Congratulatins, Steve!

@karacrabb

Ask Us Questions About Our Film 'Young and Gay in Putin's Russia'

$
0
0


When Russian President Vladimir Putin banned gay "propaganda" in June last year, Russia's LGBT community went from being a stigmatised fringe group to full-blown enemies of the state. Homophobia becoming legislation means it’s now not only accepted in Russia but actively encouraged, which has led to a depressing rise in homophobic attacks and murders.

We travelled to Russia ahead of February's Sochi Winter Olympics to investigate the effects of the country's state-sanctioned homophobia. There, we met everyone from young members of Moscow's LGBT community and core gay rights activists, to one of Putin's spin doctors and the lawmaker behind the repressive anti-gay propaganda law.

If you haven't watched it yet, you should (it's even embedded up the top there to make it easy for you). Once you've done that, head over to CNN's website. There, you can leave any questions you have about the documentary in the comments section of this article, and on Tuesday evening the film's host Milène Larsson will be answering as many of them as she can. 

The Canadian Music Industry Wants to Censor Google Searches

$
0
0

The Canadian music lobby wants us to adopt some recent American customs.

If you believe the chief lobbyist for the music industry in Canada, it’s a sad fact of life that honest, hard-working Canadian artists just aren’t making money anymore because of all the illegal downloading and the Google. Is this true? No. Is it a reason to censor the internet? No. Will common sense stop the music lobby from trying to trick the government into censoring the internet for their benefit? Of course it won’t.    

On January 16th, Graham Henderson, the head of the Music Canada (previously the Canadian Recording Industry Association) complained that Google was making it hard to find legal sources to purchase music in Canada, and was providing easy traffic for sites distributing illegally copied music. His solution? To ask the government to mandate that internet service providers censor sites and search results that link to suspected pirated material. Reaction to this plan has so far been decidedly negative. Why is it such a bad idea?  

Let’s begin with some history. Back in the late-90s when your basement dwelling uncle paid $500 for his first CD burner, the Canadian government and the music industry arrived at what can be now described as a very short-sighted deal. To “offset the lost revenue from music sharing,” the government put a 29¢ levy on each blank CD, no matter what people were buying them for.

When Napster and Kazaa came around, millions of high schoolers were involuntarily subsidizing the industry when they burned “Rap Mix 3” to bang in their discman on the bus. Since the fees were distributed based on radio airplay and commercial sales samples, the bulk of the money wound up going to—surprise—major labels and artists. Keep this in mind when you hear the industry claim to give a heck about compensation rights for artists, because the odds are they’re not referring to your friend who’s in a band.  

To date, over $100-million has been taken from the pockets of Canadian consumers in this blank media scheme. But with the mass adoption of the all-digital format beginning in the early 2000s and dominating music purchases now, the gravy train has mostly dried up. The industry failed to convince anyone it was a good idea to impose a fee on mp3 players (why not impose a levy on hard drives too, by that logic?) so all of a sudden the public trough looks empty.

Well, it’s not really empty. The Ontario government is spending $15-million a year to subsidize the province’s music industry.This is in addition to the infamous Canadian Content regulations, which stipulate that at least 35% of all major radio airtime must be the Tragically Hip or similar. As consumers shift more music consumption to digital streaming or satellite, it’s become quite easy to listen to broadcast without much exposure to Canadian artists, so I suppose this must cut into revenues a bit. What’s the plan for making money, then?  

This probably isn’t a new thing, but it’s been very fashionable lately for industries that are losing the “adapt to the internet” game to make enormous efforts to change the rules of the game to protect their interests. When your alternatives are A) adapt to survive or B) take one for the team and die on the altar of creative destruction and capitalism, I guess changing the rules seems like a good middle-ground option.

It’s no secret that the demand for music isn’t going anywhere. Instead of finding ways to deliver music in ways anyone wants, Middlemen—uh, Music Canada have chosen to throw a tantrum “because piracy.” Others are doing the same thing around the world. Personally, I’ve already stocked up on microwave popcorn in anticipation of the legal and political Wrestlemania that the presence of a 3D printer in every home will bring. Legions of people have been waiting a long time to “download a car,”and if the numbers on Game of Thrones downloads are any indication, you can bet that they’ll come close to putting Ford Motors out of business. In fact, there’s already a group working on a 3D printer large enough to construct an entire house in 24 hours.

At this moment, however, services like Netflix and Spotify have been exploding in popularity because they deliver content affordably to people in ways that leverage new technology, instead of fighting endless legal battles against it. Canadians are chomping at the bit to pay for these services, and are ironically held back by strict US IP law, bizarre licensing deals and non-arrangements, Canadian Content rules, and the industries’ own sluggishness to innovate.

Canada just went through an arduous but mostly compromise-driven process to modernize its copyright law in 2011, and the political will for censoring the internet at a domestic level seems tepid. Moralizing demands for a UK-style porn filter mercifully fell on deaf ears, hairy palms, and blind eyes in the federal Cabinet. This is for very good reason—censorship is a very blunt instrument when applied to the internet, and the UK filtering system has blocked hundreds or thousands of legal, non-porn sites labeled extremist, or pirate, or pertaining to sex education. Canadians shouldn’t accept anything of the sort. As I’ve reported for VICE before, this includes the TPP, a trade agreement under negotiation right now that threatens to radically shift the balance of our copyright laws in Big Content’s favour.  

Maybe the music lobby is afraid that in the absence of the incentive to become a famous pop star, or even to earn a decent living making music, people will give up on music and the entire sonic art form as we know it will disappear. This isn’t a convincing enough reason to censor and surveil the internet, which the Pope recently called a gift from God. As technology rapidly displaces workers and shakes up nearly every industry, it’s unfair for one business to ask the government to legislate future profits into existence by criminalizing internet users. Things are weird right now, but I’m confident we can find a better way to compensate creators for their incredible work.


@chrismalmo

We Shot Guns with Drew McDowall and Talked About the Gang He Was In

$
0
0
We Shot Guns with Drew McDowall and Talked About the Gang He Was In

Shorties: We Learned About Dollar Store Couture at the "RuPaul's Drag Race" Tour in Toronto

$
0
0

RuPaul’s Drag Race is one of the biggest and most groundbreaking cultural phenomenons of the last few years, so when we heard RuPaul's Drag Race: Battle of the Seasons was doing a tour stop in Toronto, we had to send a crew out to document the performance and party. The show—which sold out in record time—featured an impressively passionate and diverse crowd (audience member outfit of the night goes to the dude stunting in the iced out gold kicks and “Haters Need <3 Too” hat).

Viewing all 38002 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images