digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

Russian Blogger Gets Jail Sentence for Criticizing Police

news.yahoo.com — A Russian man who described local police as "scum" in an Internet posting was given a suspended jail sentence on Monday for extremism, prompting bloggers to warn of a crackdown on free speech online. Convicted on charges of "inciting hatred or enmity," Terentiev was given a one-year suspended term on Monday, Russian news agencies reported.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Masternajee, on 07/07/2008, -20/+24Any questions whether they have returned to a state of communism?
    • darny, on 07/08/2008, -5/+26Communism is an economic system, not a form of government. These kinds of outrages do not require communism to exist. As stated by other diggers in the comments, this kind of thing may be close to happening in our (USA) capitalist system.
      • shutaro, on 07/08/2008, -8/+2Your mom is communism!
      • MattB123, on 07/08/2008, -3/+3Some people just refuse to understand this.
      • normalkid0615, on 07/08/2008, -8/+4Communism is not a form of Government...

        Interesting observation...

        What does that make China?
      • notoneofus, on 07/08/2008, -2/+1@MattB123: You are referring to yourself, of course?

        @normalkid0615: A capitalist country in training?
      • darny, on 07/08/2008, -2/+1China is socialist, right? Someone correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand, their economic system is traditionally communist but they've been switching to a form of highly regulated capitalism over the years.
      • known, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3Socialism = Preventing Race to the Bottom
        Capitalism = Promoting Race to the Top
        We need both (either implicitly or indirectly) for a nation to succeed...
      • altgeeky1, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1normalkid0615 - There is no capitalism in China? Are you serious?

        You're mistaken -- we know where you are coming from, but you're confused about economic systems vs. governing philosophies. Sometimes leaders deliberately conflate governing systems with monetary systems, so this is understandable.

        Human nature does not allow for "pure" economic systems either. With pure unregulated capitalism you don't get the promised "open and free markets" you get concentrated wealth and power until you have a single monopoly. Pure communism does not exist either, because equality is unnatural and in order to enforce equality, someone ends up being the enforcer (and thus above the law).

        Strict dogma in government theory does more harm than good. The world is not black and white, so one has to be pragmatic.
      • ramiro, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3You should not take it at face value. Communism is not merely an economic system.
        It is a system of tyranny and extermination.
      • osko2052, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1And little by little America is moving towards communism.
      • Paulish, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1USA a capitalist nation? You must have gone to public school too. What we have is crony corporatism.

        John Maynard Keynes has a lot to answer for.
    • donkz, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1guy said:
      "...It'd be good if in every city there was a crematorium, like in Auschwitz, where once or twice a day we would burn a cop to clear our society from cop dirt"

      he got 1 year of PROBATION for spreading social hatred
      • Ortheos, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Sounds like a neo-nazi chatter to me. Russia has problems with those. Tee government should tighten the laws further regarding skin-heads and skin-head talk.
  • inetiatic, on 07/07/2008, -12/+52We aren't to far from this either America. One freedom at a time, leads to stuff like this!
    • gplpark92, on 07/08/2008, -2/+5once that happens i'll be singing "NOW I'M LOSSSSSTT!!!"
      • btschul, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4The Mars Volta ftw.
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3***** perfect reference. +1000

        "the hooks had been picking their scabs
        where wolves hide in the company of men

        it said
        I'm lost
        I'm lost
        now I'm lost"
    • digiframes, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4Damn straight!
    • sporg, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Agreed.
    • masamunecyrus, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1While it's not totally far-fetched to believe that we're nearing this in America, America's principles (those who criticize Bush aren't actively being poisoned) and culture (we have millions of people willing to protest, and immigrants, especially illegal ones, are tough as nails) still FAR better protect us from tyranny than Russia, and we're a long shot from being as bad as Russia.
  • rollaryne, on 07/07/2008, -7/+16@ inetiatic

    What scares me is that you are very correct. The Patriot Act is a good example but the ultimate question is how do we, as a society, say that enough is enough?

    I know that some call group this into a "left v. right" bucket, but it's not. The reality is that it's Government v. The Constitution. As of late, the Constitution seems to be on the ass end of an ass kicking.
    • Jedakiah, on 07/08/2008, -6/+3FACT: Clicking the reply button on the right is better.

      Also, the brown bear is the best bear.
    • tfbbm, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1rollaryne; It is not "Government v. The Constitution".
      It is "Political and CORPORATE Traitors v. The Constitution; the Government; the People".

      "Focus creates the clearer picture to paint the greater Story." ~witchfinger
      It is "of America" not "is" AMERICA.

      Quit SECOND CLASSing the rest of American's. State poudly and loudly the Country of your Pride and You will have true Allies at your side.
      Tell everyone.
  • JohnDBandit, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8What was it that the band Who once sang? Didn't it go something like "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"? The parties may change, the flunkies may change, the names, the times, and everything under the sun, but at the end of the day, ain't it all the same?
    • alexismyhomeboi, on 07/08/2008, -2/+2It was The Who. Song name: Won't get fooled again. Google it fool :D
    • bmcnally, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3Dugg for Pete Townshend
    • kirado4, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1carefull you'll get arrested for copyright infringement next!! ;-)
  • allanio, on 07/07/2008, -4/+2Shocking
  • RhymeTime, on 07/07/2008, -8/+2*****-Blocking
  • Minarchian, on 07/08/2008, -7/+18"The fact that Terentiev got a conditional sentence is unimportant. What's important is the precedent," a blogger named Puffinus wrote.

    The Russians understand precedence. Too bad Americans have never learned this lesson.

    • Rahodeb, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3Your logic is a bit reversed. A Russian blogger said the word "precedent", while the government he lives under just arrested a man for typing something online.

      In America you don't get arrested for typing something online.

      Who understands more about precedence.
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -2/+2"In America you don't get arrested for typing something online."

        Oh, I am sure that can be arranged.
      • tg16, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2George Bush is a terrible precedent. In fact, he's the worst of all the precedence.
      • Minarchian, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Rahodeb

        You missed my meaning.

        Take government control of the net here in America...let them get on toe in and the whole body will follow it. But try to tell that to people who support "Net Neutrality". Precedence and "slippery slope" are lost ideas on too many Americans.
  • coffee200am, on 07/08/2008, -14/+5That can happen here when you criticize Obama...
    • felman87, on 07/08/2008, -3/+13you've been to jail for criticizing Obama on digg? How much more can you fail?
  • EatingPie, on 07/08/2008, -4/+28Anyone who says we don't have free speech in the US, or that it's limited, take note.

    I was once arrested on an Air Base for a protest. They detained me briefly to get my info, drove me to my car and released me. The last words by the commander who handled my case were, "Next time, just do your protest outside the base." We did.

    -Pie
    • kyletehgreat, on 07/08/2008, -3/+5That is a touching story. I am moved.
    • gplpark92, on 07/08/2008, -3/+5That brought tears to my eyes.
    • Rudegar, on 07/08/2008, -4/+5well at least they dident make you walk :P
    • jnuffnuffnomnom, on 07/08/2008, -6/+5We're here, we're queer, get used to it!
    • shutaro, on 07/08/2008, -3/+3So moving it should be turned into an inspirational holiday film featuring Will Smith...
    • sporg, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4I would think it is common sense to not take your protest onto a military installation. Doesn't it make more sense to do it outside where the public can see you anyway? I don't see what point you are trying to make here.

      You have freedom of speech in the United States and you also have the freedom to be arrested, tear gassed, beaten, harassed, intimidated and photographed as a possible terrorist as soon as your decide to exercise that "freedom".
    • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -2/+5Hooray! We aren't as bad as Russia!

      But seriously, I believe that story about you being arrested is 100% factual. It is extremely common to have protests on Air Force bases, because it is standard operating procedure to just wave random non-military people through all the security checkpoints.

      -Lie
    • cadmiumpaint, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2whats worse...that fact that you made that stupid story up, or that you think that it would actually prove a point?
      • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3what's worse is 18 people dugg the story up
    • EatingPie, on 07/08/2008, -3/+2"Doesn't it make more sense to do it outside where the public can see you anyway?"

      It was during an Air Show. That was the reason we were on the base.

      -Pie
      • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -2/+3So the reason you were on an Air Force base was actually to see an air show, and not to protest, got it. We seem to be getting nearer to the truth. Now, tell us the real reason you were ejected from the show... Drunk and disorderly, maybe?

        -Lie
      • EatingPie, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Sheesh.

        No, I went on the base to distribute flyers. Uh... The paper kind, not the pilot kind. :-)

        This is sort of more than I intended. My main point was that in the US, free speech is very much alive, so much so you can actually protest an aspect of the military, on a military base, and not be afraid of being "disappeared" or killed... they even give you advice on the *right* way to do a protest.

        -Pie
      • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1And what was written in these alleged flyers, Mr. Pie?

        - Lie
      • EatingPie, on 07/09/2008, -2/+1In a nutshell, that air shows celebrated weapons of war, weapons responsible for the deaths of over 200,000 Iraqis during Desert Storm. Basically that they desensitized people to the real function of these planes.

        We made the flyers after several people came from the air show the year after Desert Storm, and said how "cool" it was that they had a SCUD missile there (SCUDs were used to attack and kill Israelis in an attempt to draw them into the war). I thought calling a weapon that kills "cool" profoundly disturbing, and decided to try to make this point at the following airshow.

        *Sheesh* again.

        Satisfied?

        -Pie
  • SoopaflySAM, on 07/08/2008, -3/+7Digg if you remember Xanga
  • chrissku, on 07/08/2008, -6/+1Hey Russia it's the year 2008. Get with the times. The bloggers are not trying to get you. This is not the Soviet era. This is not the cold war. Relax.
    • Kyan, on 07/08/2008, -0/+8Hey chrissku it's 2008. Get with the times. You sound completely oblivious to what is going on in Russia. It's nothing about the cold war. In fact, I'd go so far as to say most of Russia's posturing against the US and the West in general is for domestic consumption.

      Russia is ruled by a band of cronies intent on taking everything they can from ordinary Russians. They are stealing the country blind and unfortunately most Russians are cheering them on.

      So, yeah, the Russian authorities will go after the bloggers, because they cannot tolerate dissent. They do not want people asking why Gazprom (the gas monopoly) is getting bigger and bigger while most citizens are not getting any better off. Well, a little better off - just enough to keep them calm.

      It is a cold war - a war of attrition by the Russian authorities against their own people.

      It's going to be very interesting to see how it pans out. I predict a collapse in 15 or so years. Then China asserts its influence over Russia's far east energy assets and Russia basically splits up, the European part doing its best to keep face, but still incapable of adopting normal European values, while the east of the country degenerates into tribal poltiics of the worst kind and ethnic Russians are routed while regions slip into the arms of China and Asia.

      Tatarstan will reinforce its borders and actually try to have a civil society and may be successful if the West can pull its collective head out long enough to care.

      /just considering the possibilities!
      • chrissku, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Wow....thank you. What you wrote was both well written and very well thought out Kyan. Very informative.
      • kirado4, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1sorry but I fail to see how that's really that different than Soviet Russia? ;-)
  • pstroll, on 07/08/2008, -9/+2But cops are scum! The two are synonyms.
  • colonelpanic, on 07/08/2008, -2/+16Mr. Gorbachev-Tear down this blog!
  • UltraDavid, on 07/08/2008, -4/+10Those cops are scum.

    Eat it, Putin!
  • bbqsalad, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6In soviet Russia, ... this happens.
  • JNudda, on 07/08/2008, -4/+2In Soviet Russia, blog write you!
  • MattB123, on 07/08/2008, -6/+11It's almost as bad as outing a CIA operative to shut down their spouse who was "overly critical" of an administration.

    At least with the Russians, it doesn't seem like they are trying to hide their oppression under the veil of "Protecting freedom". It's just good old fashioned oppression.
    • Egoist, on 07/08/2008, -3/+5You're saying that the outing of a single CIA operative is worse than a complete loss of freedom of speech?

      You've gotten yourself so worked up bashing the US that logic flew out the window.
      • MattB123, on 07/08/2008, -2/+1I'm comparing one example from each side. I think being an up front oppressor is not as bad as being a sneaky one. A complete loss of freedom of speech is a terrible thing. But claiming to be the beacon of freedom while secretly being the opposite just adds being a hypocrite to the list of offenses.

        And I'm bashing an administration, not a country.
      • Egoist, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2You have yet to explain how outing a single CIA agent is "oppressive." How exactly are your rights, the rights of your family, and the rights of your community oppressed because Valerie Plame was outted?

        As heinous as the outing of an undercover CIA agent is, how you can consider this worse to the loss of the freedom of speech makes me wonder exactly what your priorities are.

        Digg is full of people like you who claim to not hate the US, just the administration. However I guarantee that no matter who the President is, you would cobble together comparisons to show that no matter how bad some *****-hole on the other side of the world has become, the US is even worse. There is no light in your gray cloud of despair.
    • ramiro, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Then why don't you move there.
      • MattB123, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Wow, what a fantastic counter-argument you present.
        That one is right up there with "If you love it, why don't you marry it?".
      • ramiro, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1No, it is not a counter-argument. It is a question.

        If this is almost as bad as CIA blah-blah-blah and you hold this BRILLIANT AND FANTASTIC ARGUMENT of "at least the Russians are not trying to hide their oppression", then why don't you move to Russia?

        So, why do you stay in the USA? Answer me or shut up - see I am not "trying to hide my oppression" so at least I am not as bad as the CIA blah-blah-blah...
  • btschul, on 07/08/2008, -5/+7***** Russia! ***** the Russian Police!
    Hahaha I'm in the USA you can't get me!
  • bagurka, on 07/08/2008, -0/+7He didn't get the sentence for "criticizing police". The idiot was very specific and said that police officers "should be publicly burned at stake".
  • SemiSarcastic, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4Bill Cosby: "Now you see these kids with the blog whatchados and the Russian kids listen to that rap music and type up those words and then you get the police and the Putin with puddin' and zipp zopp zappy do!
  • CyphreDias, on 07/08/2008, -3/+4Communism has social, economic and political elements. No country has ever been truly Communist. Communism was (and is) cool-aid fed to the people to start revolutions. True communism is too idealistic to work.

    The Constitution got it right. The founding fathers knew their stuff. America is not following The Constitution.
    • Egoist, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. As we've seen recently with some landmark Supreme Court decisions, the US is very much following the Constitution.
      • rollaryne, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0@ Egoist

        While there are a number of landmark Supreme Court decisions as of late, I would still argue that the Government (as an institution) winning over the Constitution.

        At a high level, historically - as well as recently - the Government has implemented the suspension of habeas corpus (almost seems to be hit or miss), warrantless surveillance, changing the status of a prisoner to "enemy combatant", even if a U.S. citizen, in order to remove due process and suppression of the press.

        From my point of view, we have a number of judges that are defending the Constitution but not enough politicians ad hearing to it.

      • Egoist, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1But this is a perfect example of the Constitution not only being followed, but still being held as the law of the land. These are examples of checks and balances where one branch of government tries to overextend itself, and by an ordinary person fighting it all the way up to the Supreme Court, is able to overturn the unconstitutional decisions of the leader of the free world.

        This isn't at a high level historically either. High levels were when Japanese-Americans were being herded into concentration camps. High levels were when Lincoln suspended habeas corpus for the entire country, not just to "enemy combatants."

        If anything, the Constitution is more in effect than at anytime in our nation's history.
      • Singularitarian, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Egoist, what do you say to Ron Paul's message that we should return to the Constitution? You think he's wrong, and that we in fact haven't strayed too far from the Constitution? In what ways specifically is he wrong?
      • rollaryne, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0Hi,

        Yes, the Japaneses-Americans and Lincoln suspending habeas corpus are great examples, but I'm not sure I follow you on how the Constitution being held as the law of the land, Egoist.

        The the Government has implemented the suspension of habeas corpus, warrantless surveillance, changing the status of a prisoner to enemy combatant, suppression of the press is going on today and VERY few judges are moving against such actions. While we are not rounding up masses of people, the Government is still disregarding the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments when it suits them.

        Please help me understand, from your point of view, how it is more in effect today than any time. I believe I am missing your point.

        When I said "at a high level", I wasn't referring to the level activity. My intent was imply a high level conversation about abuses of the Constitution.

        RR


    • rugabug, on 07/08/2008, -2/+2Yea the constitution got it all right with that whole slavery thing.
      • CyphreDias, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1The Constitution says, "All men are created equal", but even as those words were being written, slaves were working the land. The Constitution presented an ideal, but the founders were not able to just snap their fingers and free the slaves. Its amazing and wonderful that those words were immortalized in The Constitution considering the zeitgeist of the day.
  • 360news, on 07/08/2008, -6/+5Why are bloggers so stupid as to think themselves above the law?
    He was inciting violence on a member of the police force!
    These comments - my god - did you even read the article, or are you just anti-russians or robot diggers?

  • FearFactory, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1In Soviet Russia speech frees you?
  • 360news, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2How come there are 6 (*count em SIX) front pages from MakiMaki in world at the moment?
    Is he super digger or is dig broke ?
  • garths, on 07/08/2008, -6/+0Dear Russians,
    Didn't you learn your lesson the first, second or third time?

    Well, four should do it.
  • Fhwqhgads, on 07/08/2008, -2/+1They need to crack down on that nasty, evil thing called free speech!
  • rugabug, on 07/08/2008, -0/+6"wrote in a blog last year that the police force should be cleaned up by ceremonially burning officers twice a day in a town square."
    Yea nothing to see here people. He got what he deserved.
  • macgecko, on 07/08/2008, -0/+5Sorry but I am all for the charges and the verdict because if you think saying "that the police force should be cleaned up by ceremonially burning officers twice a day in a town square." then your just sick. That is hate speech pure and simple! Let me give you an example of free speech "our police officers should be charged with breaking the law as they are notorious for taking bribes" notice the difference? So for those of you whom are a little slow I make is simple, calling for any human or animal for that matter to be burned alive in the public square is a bad thing. The rule of law is important because if you think that the law officers should be tortured and murdered for your amusement then don't be surprised with the tugs they once protected you from come and visit you and your family. I am sure they will be equally as kind to you and yours...
  • wezults, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Cant these guys blog anonymously for now...
  • trollick, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4Calling for "ceremonially burning officers twice a day in a town square" is not really "criticizing police".
    • adeptusliberus, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I'd definitely call that going WAY too far. If you want to contribute to a running debate about government, police, politics, law, etc. that's great, but we don't need to encourage anybody to inflict physical harm on anyone else.
  • scabbers, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Notice how the blog site isn't mentioned anywhere.

    HINT: It was Livejournal
  • AlienMushroom, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1SOME POLICE ARE SCUMS!
    ***** THOSE POLICE!
  • Rahodeb, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1*****
  • Fhwqhgads, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1hmm, someone has a broken sarcasm detector....
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.