Amnesty urges Egypt to drop charges against activist for Twitter comments

Amnesty International Egypthas urged the military authorities to drop charges against an activist accused of prison sentences the country's ruling military generals on Twitter, in what could prove to be a landmark case for freedom in post-Mubarak Egypt.

Asmaa Mahfouz, co-founder of the movement influential 6 April was summoned to a military court Sunday after posting two sentences interneton. "If the justice system does not give us our rights, nobody should be upset if armed groups emerge and carry out assassinations," she wrote. "As long as there is no law there is no justice, anything can happen and no one should be upset."

Revolutionary in Egypt have been campaigning against the use of military trials since the fall of former President Hosni Mubarak in February, and the issue has been a major faultline in College for the November parliamentary elections, when the army has promised to return to barracks. Many have complained that the reply of the Supreme Council of the armed forces [SCAF] on legitimate criticism echoes, the Mubarak regime.

Mahfouz, 26, who also criticized the Council last month in an interview with al-Jazeera, has been released on £ 2,000 bail. On Tuesday, she was referred to a military Tribunal, although no date has been set for her case.

General Adel Morsy, as head of the Department of Justice Commission, defended the army the right to charge Mahfouz. "No citizen shall be condemned [] for an opinion, they adopt freely, as long as this statement is objective and not infringe other people's rights, or vilify them and their dignity," he said in a statement. "If the said opinion goes beyond these limits, the penalties becomes necessary as it is regarded as a crime of insult."

Heba Morayef, a researcher with the Egypt Human Rights Watch, said the case highlighted the Council deliberate intimidation of critics. "The accusations against Mahfouz all found in the Egyptian Penal Code, even if insulting public officials – including the use of strong words-is allowed under international human rights," she said. "This underlines the need to review all repressive laws used by the Government to stifle freedoms of speech, freedom of Association and freedom of Association – all of which are under attack".

Activist Noor Ayman Noor said 10,000 military trials had taken place in recent months, including many involving peaceful demonstrators. "The SCAF has noted that the public has not taken a strong stand against these attempts so that they now extend them to activists. Only today, I was informed that three more activists were summoned to a military consultation ".

View the original article here

Terminators: drone strikes Against rapid to consider the ethics of killer robots

A combine harvester terminator in the Warner Bros. film Terminator Salvation. Report warns of a journey towards a Terminator-like reality. Image: Shooting Star/eyevine

The increasing use of unmanned aircraft in combat situations raises important moral and legal issues, and threatens to make war more likely as armed robots takes over from people, according to an internal investigation of the Ministry of defence.

Report warns of the danger of a "step-by-step and involuntary travel against a Terminator-like reality", referring to James Cameron's 1984 film, is chased by the robotic killing machines in which people. It says the pace of technological development is gathering pace for the application of this rate to United Kingdom quickly should establish a policy for what would constitute "acceptable machine behaviour".

"It is essential that before unmanned systems become ubiquitous (if it is too late already) … we ensure that by removing some of the horror, or at least keep it at a distance, we do not run the risk of losing our controlling humanity and make war more likely," the report warns, titled The UK approach to unmanned aircraft systems. The remaining officials have never before stumbled along so honestly ethical with the use of male broods. The report was commissioned by Britain's Defence chiefs and coincides with continuing controversy about male broods use in Afghanistan, and growing Pakistani anger at CIA drone attacks against suspected insurgents on the Afghan borders.

It is stated that "the recent extensive use of unmanned aircraft over Pakistan and Yemen can already heralds a new era". Regard to the descriptions of "killer male broods" in Afghanistan, notes that "sentiment is likely to run high as armed systems acquire more autonomy".

Insurgents "gain every time a mistake is made" activation of them to throw themselves "in underdog role and the West as a cowardly Bully, is unwilling to risk his own troops, but is happy to kill remote access", adds the report.

Pakistan demanded last week that the U.S. stops drone strikes and drastically cut its CIA officers. David Cameron said in December that British male broods had killed 124 rebels in Afghanistan since June 2008, when them as a "classic example of a modern weaponswhich are necessary for today's war ". Male broods, known as the Reapers to date, has fired 167 missiles and bombs in Afghanistan.

The report was drawn up last month by the Ministry's internal thinktank, development, concepts and doctrine Centre (DCDC), based in Shrivenham, Wiltshire, which is part of the MoD central staff. The Centre's reports shall be sent to the most senior officers in all three branches of the armed forces and influence policy and strategy.

The concept of "fighting from barracks" or "remote warrior" raises such questions as whether a person who operates air vehicles – sometimes from thousands of miles away and "walking in the streets of his hometown after a break" – is a legitimate aim as a giant. "We fully understand the psychological effects on external operators to wage war at a distance?" asks officials. There is one school of thought, the Note, which proposes, for war is morally, in contrast to just legal, "it must link the killing of enemies with an element of self-sacrifice or at least risk to himself."

"Human in the loop role before now, been a legal requirement, as we are now seeing is eroded," warns against the report. Asks: "what is human from a moral and ethical point of view role in automated systems? … To a robotic, a school bus and a tank is the same – only algorithms in an application … the robot has no sense of ends, ways, do not need to know why it is that the pursuit of a goal. "Chris Cole, a defender that is running Drone wars UK website, which monitors the development of unmanned weapons systems, welcomed the investigation Against at the same time calling for a moratorium on the use of male broods of British forces.

"There must be an open and public debate about the implications of remote warfare, and it may be that a Parliamentary Select Committee of inquiry would be the appropriate forum to initiate this discussion," he said. The report notes Against "currently has no intention to develop systems that operate without human intervention in weapons command and control chain".

However, is Against, as the Pentagon, eager to develop more and more sophisticated "automatic" weapons, it admits.

The report also identifies the benefits of an unmanned weapons system, which prevents the potential loss of aircrew life, which means "is in itself morally justified." It adds: "Robots can not emotional, can not hate. A robot cannot be driven by anger to carry out illegal actions such as the My Lai [massacre by American troops of hundreds of unarmed civilians in South Viet Nam in March 1968].

"In theory" says, therefore, Against the investigation, "autonomy should enable more ethical and legal warfare. However, we must ensure that clear accountability for robotic tanks exist, and it raises a number of difficult negotiations. A programmer is guilty of a war crime, if a system failure leads to an illegal operation? Where is the intent required for an accident to be a crime? "

U.S.-produced General Atomics Reaper is currently RAFS armed only unmanned aircraft. It can carry up to four Hellfire missiles, two 230 kg (500 lb) bombs and 12 Paveway II guided bombs. It can fly more than 18 hours, have a range of 3,600 km and can operate at up to 15 metres (50, 000 ft).

The Reaper is operated by RAF personnel based at Creech in Nevada. It is controlled via a satellite data link. Earlier this year David Cameron promised to increase the number of RAF Reapers in Afghanistan from four to nine at an estimated cost of £ 135 million.

Courage is also funding the development of the BAE Systems a long-range unmanned aircraft, known as Taranis, designed to fly "jet speed" between continents while controlled from anywhere in the world using satellite communications.

Richard Norton-Taylor

View the original article here

ACS: Law ceases claims against illegal filesharers

ACS: Law says, it will no longer chasing alleged copyright infringers. Photo: Claudio Bresciani/Scanpix/SCANPIX/PA photos

The controversial London-based law firm which sent tens of thousands of letters demanding payment from people the accused of the file sharing illegal has dramatically Quit his copyright litigation claims death threats causing the "enormous effort" lead solicitor's family.

Andrew Crossley, founder and lead solicitor by ACS: Law, announced in a statement to the patents county court in London yesterday afternoon, that his company would no longer chasing alleged copyright infringers.

"I have ended my work. I have been the subject of criminal attack. My e-mail messages been hacked. I have had death threats and bomb threats, "said Crossley, read in the sentence to the Court by barrister, Tim Ludbrook, acting on behalf of copyright licensee MediaCAT. "It has caused immense inconvenience me and my family."

ACS: Law is at the heart of a long-running row above its method in so-called "speculative invoicing", where thousands of generic letters sent Internet users to the suspected of illegal file sharing. Solicitors Regulation Authority is currently examining its practice as hundreds of accused the claim has been erroneously identified.

In September last year was the personal details of thousands of Britons after a devastating attack on ACS: Law Homepage leaked online. The details, including telephone numbers and addresses, measuring spot online under a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack on your company's servers. Information Commissioner is exploring the data breach and be authorised to charge a £ 500,000 fine, if ACS: Law is found to have held the information the system administrator.

Crossleys revelation came at the end of yesterday's patents county court hearing in 27 people accused of illegally sharing copyrighted pornography, which is exclusive licensee MediaCAT.

Of thousands of letters have, ACS: Law sent to prosecuting these alleged 27 cases are the only to be heard before a judge. ACS: Law tried to release the event just days before its first Court hearing earlier this month, but was told that the first requirement, for the Court's permission.

Judge Birss QC called the situation "absolutely extraordinary", and said: "I am not happy about this. My impression, distinct on each twist and turn there is a desire to avoid judicial control.

"It seems to be the first instinct is to avoid judicial control. There have been thousands of letters and only 27 cases have had to be dropped – I doubt. Copyright infringement is a serious matter, but this is just mindboggling. "

Lengthy hearings have further complicated by the recent emergence of a separate law firm issuing similar payment requirements on behalf of MediaCAT, known as a British Ltd. ACS: Law claims to have no connection with UK Ltd, with the exception of two of its former employees founded the newly established law firm.

Judge Birss said, he had considered the prohibition of ACS: Law's client, MediaCAT, from sending any more payment requirements until its claims and renteansøgere clarified. "It would be an extraordinary order, to do," he added. "But these are exceptional circumstances".

Patents Court expected to rule later this week about whether or not ACS: Law should be allowed to cancel the event, and whether or not the owner of copyright – understood to be Sheptonhurst, the owner of the UK's biggest sex shop chain, Private – have to join the case as a creditor.

View the original article here