From here and from there -22
I’ll open this thread of links with good news, and it is coming from no other than New Jersey. There are many questions about privacy in the era of facebook, It will take time until we will be able to sort the right formulation of privacy and the limits we set on corporations like google from using the knowledge the gather about us. But it is even more important to keep the government from abusing its power and protect our privacy:
The Supreme Court of New Jersey became the first court in the nation yesterday to rule that people have an expectation of privacy when they are online, and law enforcement officials need a grand jury warrant to have access to their private information.
In state proceedings, the ruling will take precedence over what attorneys describe as weaker U.S. Supreme Court decisions that hold there is no right to privacy on the internet.
It was somewhat amusing when in France the court ordered Amazon to stop the practice of Free Shipping, in the name of protecting competition and consumers interests. This story joins it proudly . This is how you justify government monopoly on alcohol in Sweden:
Imagine that you suddenly get this question from a tourist. Perhaps you know exactly how you should answer. If not, it might be good to know what the results of a recent survey showed: The Swedish alcohol monopoly saves many lives each year. If strong beer (Note: beer with more that 3.5% alchohol per volume), wine and spirits were sold in grocery stores consumption would increase by 30%, researchers believe. And they stress that this is a conservative estimation—the increase could be more. They calculate that there will be approximately 1,600 more deaths each year, 14,000 more assaults and around 16 million more sick days.
So the monopoly makes a huge difference for a lot of Swedes. And because it will only be around as long as people want it to be, we at Systembolaget have to do everything in our power to make sure our customers are satisfied.
This has resulted in our having perhaps the world’s largest assortment of strong beer, wine and spirits. (And an assortment one not finds in Stockholm and Gothenburg, but also in Jokkmokk and Töreboda.)
But if am I already bashing the Europeans for their lack of respect for Human Rights and individual’s liberty I can’t avoid the Brigitte Bardot story. The idea that people stand a trail for insulting others and the lack of freedom of speech in France is simply sad. As a side note it is also very interesting how it is more important to some people, Bardot including, to treat animals like humans while they are treating other humans like animals…
French former film star Brigitte Bardot went on trial on Tuesday for insulting Muslims, the fifth time she has faced the charge of “inciting racial hatred” over her controversial remarks about Islam and its followers.
[…]
Since retiring from the film industry in the 1970s, Bardot has become a prominent animal rights activist but she has also courted controversy by denouncing Muslim traditions and immigration from predominantly Muslim countries.
Reading the NY Times is often upsetting, but than once in awhile it demonstrates why it is an important newspaper. This story dig deep into who are the military analyst appearing on our evening news show, what motivate them and what is the quality of the analysis we are getting. It is not a short reading, but it is highly recommended.
To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.
Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.
And the last link for this post will focus on the true conditions of bloggers. Sometimes considered an hobby or a more comfortable for those who chose it as profession the true nature beyond the risk of blogging reveals here:
Please come to rescue me! 
Related posts
Rogel @ April 26, 2008
Wow, coming from Brigitte Bardot is saying something! Usually people who are totally focussed on animals are less considerate towards other people themselves. My mom is visiting from Holland and it is out of control how ‘politically correct’ or.. afraid perhaps Europeans have become? Call a spade a spade..the moment you allow intolerant elements in society to define discourse, you can kiss your own opinions goodbye! I’ve lived in Saudi Arabia, I’ve seen ‘two sides’ of ignorant AND enlightened Islam (in individuals of course!) and I’ve always been the first to be accepting of another person’s belief system, BUT..intolerance is unacceptable. The nature of it is such that you can never give a hand as your whole body will be taken. Sometimes, when you think you automatically respect another human being, you DO need to be realistic enough that not everybody shares that respect.
I do worry about that Muslim intolerance in Europe. There are situations where you can say that they were not integrated well enough or at all into local society but the types of Muslims that seem to stir things up, would never be able to do so in their home country.
Ingrid
Ingrid,
I don’t really worry about the Muslim immigrants. The problem is with the hosting countries and cultures. If Europe was confident enough to protect its culture, and mostly to protect human rights most of this problem would not exist.
I don’t know Rogel if it’s so much an issue of ‘confidence’ with the hosting countries. People know who they are and the long histories and identities they have. I don’t think they realize how to deal with extremism and their starting point or default position (in some countries anyway) is one of acceptance for the sake of it rather than looking at it on case by case basis. Also, here in the US you have the history of ‘rights and freedoms, you don’t in Europe..
Ingrid