At 11:59 AM -0800 2/8/00, wayne clerke wrote:
...
>> Sounds like just the place to run my Internet Porn site out of. With a
>> sideline of selling Salman Rushdie's books.
>>
>> Oh, you mean Islam and Islamic nations have a very, very long list of
>> things they don't allow, things they execute people for selling?
>>
>> Never mind.
>
>Heh. Tim is always so damn quick to jump down my throat. I guess it's
>the 'rag-head' address :-)
I'm not jumping down your throat. I'm pointing out some rather obvious
flaws in hosting any kind of Net business out of a Muslim country.
>I thought the site was interesting anyway. I'm not proposing anyone set up
>a porn site (though I don't see why you wouldn't set up, say, the money side
>of it there).
First, I didn't claim you proposed setting up a porn site there. (Getting a
little worried about a rap on the door from the Islamic Guard, are you,
Wayne?)
Second, the point is not about porn per se. The point is about a total
absence of anything approaching "free speech" in any Islamic country I can
think of. (Perhaps more distant Islamic countries, like Malaysia, are more
tolerant. Oh, they hang those caught with pot, and they ban certain
newspapers, so I guess not.)
Third, as to the idea of just having the "money side" of the Internet porn
site or the Rushdie site in the UAE, haven't you heard of asset
confiscation or freezing? The United States, for example, frequently
freezes and seizes the assets in the U.S. of its political or moral
enemies. What _real_ assurance would there be that the UAE would not seize
the financial accounts of, say, Larry Flynt if he set up the money side of
"Hustler Online" in the UAE?
The point about the ban on "Playboy" in Anguilla or the ban on dealings
with Israel in most Islamic states is not about whether one wants to enter
these kinds of businesses.
>I doubt if the UAE would ever invade the shores of your country to come get
>you either. Or do you think maybe the USA govt. would send you off to a
>trial
>in the UAE? If worse came to worst, you may wish to avoid travelling to the
>UAE, but I don't think it's on the top of anyone's list anyway.
>
As I said, it would be enough of a disincentive just to know that my
financial assets inside the UAE might be seized.
And travel to the UAE might not be the only concern. Kleptocracies often
cooperate with other kleptocracies and theocracies as a means of "shaking
down" the target and keeping their own sheeple in line. Recall the recent
case where an American accused by the German state of publishing
thoughtcrime material in the U.S. was arrested when he landed in Denmark
(IIRC) and then transferred to the Politically Correct State of Germany.
I can imagine precisely the same thing happening if one were to travel to
Indonesia (Islamic), Malaysia (ditto), Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon,
etc. Maybe even to states in Europe which have set up "you ship our thought
criminals to us, we'll ship your thought criminals to you" cross-licensing
arrangements.
The UAE is just another Islamic dictatorship.
--Tim May
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
