Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? Wouldn't that be worth it ? Or did I miss that post? R
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:23:58PM -0400, Smith, Rick wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ?
Wouldn't that be worth it ?
Or did I miss that post?
Do they even have Internet? http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/af.html Internet Service Providers (ISPs): NA -Basil
On Tuesday, September 18, 2001, at 12:43 PM, Basil Kruglov wrote:
Do they even have Internet?
Yes, they very recently cracked down on usage, restricting access to one machine in the head of government's office (I forget what the title was). Any requests for information from the Internet from other branches of their government are to go through this one guy, who is unlikely to approve the request (according to the news report I read). Source long since forgotten... One would expect high compliance in a regime that parades hands and feet of offenders down the street... -Bill
At 11:43 AM 9/18/2001 -0500, Basil Kruglov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:23:58PM -0400, Smith, Rick wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ?
Wouldn't that be worth it ?
Or did I miss that post?
Do they even have Internet?
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/af.html Internet Service Providers (ISPs): NA
It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas. Either that, or their beliefs are so strongly held, so pure, so obvious that other ideas / beliefs need not even be examined. Apparently the "boys and girls" are simply told what to believe, and the reasoning behind or, or counter arguments to it, are irrelevant. No discussion or substantiation is necessary, "people with clue" told them so. I vote for #1. What does the rest of NANOG think?
-Basil
-- TTFN, patrick
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh? resist the cycle of violence and hate. randy
On the topic of cutting off things...(and yes, this is partially off topic, but it is relevant) (Clear Channel's new list of songs they won't play) http://www.fuckedcompany.com/extras/clearchannel_email.cfm and (U.S. citizens back encryption controls ) http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7215723.html?tag=mn_hd On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh?
resist the cycle of violence and hate.
randy
I stand corrected on the clearchannel thing: http://www.clearchannel.com/timages/article/Playlist-final.doc my bad...t On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh?
resist the cycle of violence and hate.
randy
At 12:01 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh?
Absolutely. When someone claims they are in power, or smarter than you, or just know better, and tell you to do something you think is a poor idea, or simply something you do not want to do, you should research and find out why. Do not just take their word for it. And the Internet is a darned good way of getting that outside information for many, many people. Of course, that opens a long discussion because there are obvious exceptions - parents and children, military personnel, bosses & employees. It is easy to see how someone could extend that to a government and its people. I do not believe it should be in most circumstances. Maybe I am wrong. But that is straying too far off topic even for me.
randy
-- TTFN, patrick
As already was pointed out - keeping comm channels open to Afganistan is not an issue. The only people having access to the channels are exactly those who will only interpret what comes thru as more crap from the infidels. Ochlocracy is the term for what's going on over there. In fact, it may be quite worthwhile to close their two-way comms to make coordination of adversarial activity abroad harder to them. The open access makes sense as an a tool for influencing people's opinions _only_ when people have widely available and unfiltered access. If Afganistan had any independent ISPs, I'd say do everything possible to make them successful. Alas, this is not the case. I'd say the better way of communicating would be the classical native-language radio translation in Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe fashion, otherwise known as propaganda. Worked well for the USSR. Radios are cheap and realtively available (and hard to control, too). May be worthwhile to actually air-drop loads of small and easy to hide solar-powered units. I'd expect a lot of people to listen to those in hiding even when threatened with execution for mere posession. Given the air superiority of NATO, controlling use of those radios by the local propaganda units can be very easy - just drop radio-guided missiles on Taliban transmitters. --vadim On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
At 12:01 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh?
Absolutely.
When someone claims they are in power, or smarter than you, or just know better, and tell you to do something you think is a poor idea, or simply something you do not want to do, you should research and find out why. Do not just take their word for it. And the Internet is a darned good way of getting that outside information for many, many people.
Of course, that opens a long discussion because there are obvious exceptions - parents and children, military personnel, bosses & employees. It is easy to see how someone could extend that to a government and its people. I do not believe it should be in most circumstances. Maybe I am wrong.
But that is straying too far off topic even for me.
randy
-- TTFN, patrick
You're talking about a country with very little electricity, non-existent telecom and no running water. You do realize this don't you? Curtis On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote:
As already was pointed out - keeping comm channels open to Afganistan is not an issue. The only people having access to the channels are exactly those who will only interpret what comes thru as more crap from the infidels. Ochlocracy is the term for what's going on over there.
In fact, it may be quite worthwhile to close their two-way comms to make coordination of adversarial activity abroad harder to them.
The open access makes sense as an a tool for influencing people's opinions _only_ when people have widely available and unfiltered access. If Afganistan had any independent ISPs, I'd say do everything possible to make them successful. Alas, this is not the case.
I'd say the better way of communicating would be the classical native-language radio translation in Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe fashion, otherwise known as propaganda. Worked well for the USSR. Radios are cheap and realtively available (and hard to control, too). May be worthwhile to actually air-drop loads of small and easy to hide solar-powered units. I'd expect a lot of people to listen to those in hiding even when threatened with execution for mere posession.
Given the air superiority of NATO, controlling use of those radios by the local propaganda units can be very easy - just drop radio-guided missiles on Taliban transmitters.
--vadim
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
At 12:01 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ? It is my understanding that the free flow of ideas and discussion of same is detrimental to an extremist or dictatorial government. Such governments rarely (ever?) survive open discussions and flow of ideas.
so i guess we should not advocate cutting off that flow, eh?
Absolutely.
When someone claims they are in power, or smarter than you, or just know better, and tell you to do something you think is a poor idea, or simply something you do not want to do, you should research and find out why. Do not just take their word for it. And the Internet is a darned good way of getting that outside information for many, many people.
Of course, that opens a long discussion because there are obvious exceptions - parents and children, military personnel, bosses & employees. It is easy to see how someone could extend that to a government and its people. I do not believe it should be in most circumstances. Maybe I am wrong.
But that is straying too far off topic even for me.
randy
-- TTFN, patrick
-- ------------------------------------------------------------ Curtis Maurand System Administrator lamere.net Powered by Prexar http://www.lamere.net mailto:curtis@lamere.net Linux, OS/2, Windows (any flavor) http://www.prexar.com Cisco, OpenRoute, Lucent MySQL, SQL Server, PHP, Perl ------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:48:53PM -0700, Vadim Antonov wrote:
I'd say the better way of communicating would be the classical native-language radio translation in Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe fashion, otherwise known as propaganda. Worked well for the USSR.
You mean _against_ the USSR?
Radios are cheap and realtively available (and hard to control, too). May be worthwhile to actually air-drop loads of small and easy to hide solar-powered units. I'd expect a lot of people to listen to those in hiding even when threatened with execution for mere posession.
Given the air superiority of NATO, controlling use of those radios by the local propaganda units can be very easy - just drop radio-guided missiles on Taliban transmitters.
How do I configure my router to filter out warmongers? -- Ng Pheng Siong <ngps@post1.com> * http://www.post1.com/home/ngps
At 11:51 PM 9/19/01 +0800, Ng Pheng Siong wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:48:53PM -0700, Vadim Antonov wrote:
I'd say the better way of communicating would be the classical native-language radio translation in Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe fashion, otherwise known as propaganda. Worked well for the USSR.
You mean _against_ the USSR?
No, just against the communist government :) -- Dave's Engineering Page: http://www.dvanhorn.org I would have a link to http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?KC6ETE-9 here in my signature line, but due to the inability of sysadmins at TELOCITY to differentiate a signature line from the text of an email, I am forbidden to have it.
Does anyone even have a list of IP blocks allocated on a national or regional level? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Smith, Rick" <rsmith@atsworld.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:23 AM Subject: Afghanistan
Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ?
Wouldn't that be worth it ?
Or did I miss that post?
R
In the immortal words of Tim Devries (tim.devries@inquent.com):
Does anyone even have a list of IP blocks allocated on a national or regional level?
"None" and "none." Afghanistan barely has working voice phone service, and the Taliban issued an edict banning all computers and most especially internet access several months ago. Note reply-to. -n ------------------------------------------------------------<memory@blank.org> "Thus do `Snuff Movies' take their place with `Political-Correctness,' `Sex Addiction,' and `Postmodernism' as Godzillas of bogus moral panic, always threatening to crush the nation in their jaws, but never quite willing to take the final step of biting down. (--www.suck.com) <http://blank.org/memory/>----------------------------------------------------
What about all other nations and states? I think that type of information would be useful regardless of this particular situation. Anyone know if arin et al catagorizes and publishes this information? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan J . Mehl" <memory-nanog@blank.org> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:45 AM Subject: Re: Afghanistan
In the immortal words of Tim Devries (tim.devries@inquent.com):
Does anyone even have a list of IP blocks allocated on a national or regional level?
"None" and "none."
Afghanistan barely has working voice phone service, and the Taliban issued an edict banning all computers and most especially internet access several months ago.
Note reply-to.
-n
------------------------------------------------------------<memory@blank.
org>
"Thus do `Snuff Movies' take their place with `Political-Correctness,' `Sex Addiction,' and `Postmodernism' as Godzillas of bogus moral panic, always threatening to crush the nation in their jaws, but never quite willing to take the final step of biting down. (--www.suck.com)
<http://blank.org/memory/>-------------------------------------------------- --
participants (13)
-
Basil Kruglov -
Bill McGonigle -
Curtis Maurand -
David VanHorn -
Nathan J . Mehl -
Ng Pheng Siong -
Patrick W. Gilmore -
Randy Bush -
Richard Welty -
Smith, Rick -
Tim Devries -
Todd Suiter -
Vadim Antonov