Thursday, December 16, 2010

Từ miễn thị thực Visa tới làm giấy chứng minh gốc Việt Nam - Lê Duy San

Lê Duy San

Chế độ Cộng Sản nói chung, chế độ Cộng Sản Việt Nam nói riêng, là một chế độ Công An trị, nghĩa là dùng công an tức dùng vũ lực để cai trị đất nước, cai trị người dân.

Trước năm 1985, chế độ Cộng Sản VN hầu như chỉ có một bộ luật, hay nói cho đúng hơn, một văn kiện luật pháp duy nhất đó là bản Hiếp Pháp, còn tất cả đều là Nghị Quyết (của Đảng), Pháp Lệnh (của Quốc Hội) hay Nghị Định (của Thủ Tướng, Bộ Trưởng). Tới năm 1985, vì kinh tế quyệt quệ, cả nước sống trong lầm than đói khổ, bọn Việt Cộng, vì sống còn, phải thay đổi chính sách đối với kinh tế. Nhưng cải tổ kinh tế mà không có luật pháp thì cũng không thể nào lôi kéo được đầu tư của ngoại quốc. Do đó, bắt đầu từ năm 1986, Việt Nam đã có những luật lệ về đầu tư, ngân hàng.

Tuy nhiên mãi tới năm 1993, ngày 6 tháng 7, tức sau ngày Hoa Kỳ cởi bỏ cấm vận cho VN, trường Đại Học Luật Khoa Hà Nội mới được thành lập với mục đích đào tạo các chuyên gia về luật pháp để phục vụ nhu cầu phát triển của đất nước và hội nhập vào cộng đồng quốc tế. Thực ra thì trước sau, bọn Việt Cộng cũng chỉ dùng luật pháp để bảo vệ chế độ. Nếu có áp dụng thì cũng chỉ để áp dụng cho ngoại kiều, cho những nước mà chúng cần phải o bế để có viện trợ, có giao dịch thương mại. Cũng vì vậy mà vấn đề quốc tịch của những người Việt tỵ nạn Cộng Sản cũng đã được chúng nói đi, nói lại nhiều lần, mỗi lần một khác, tùy theo sự kiện, tùy theo mục đích và chính sách của chúng.

Chúng ta còn nhớ vào tháng 12 năm 2005, cô Lisa Phạm, một người Mỹ gốc Việt tỵ nạn, bị bắt tại thành phố Saigon về tội “Chống phá chế độ” chiếu điều 88 bộ luật Hình Sự vì cô đã tham gia nói chuyện trên diễn đàn Paltalk. Nhà cầm quyền Việt Nam lấy cớ rằng, dù cô Lisa Phạm đã nhập quốc tịch của nước thường trú là Hoa Kỳ nhưng cô vẫn là công dân Việt Nam và chính quyền Việt Nam vẫn có quyền xét xử cô khi cô phạm luật VN. Theo luật quốc tịch VN thì điều này đúng, ở đây chúng tôi chỉ bàn về khiá cạnh song tịch mà thôi chứ không bàn về tôi phạm, vì khi chúng ta bỏ nước ra đi là chúng ta không chấp nhận chế độ độc tài dã man Cộng Sản Việt Nam chứ không phải chúng ta từ bỏ quốc tịch Việt Nam.

Và ngay cả khi chúng ta nhập tịch Hoa Kỳ hay một nước nào khác, chúng ta cũng không hề tuyên bố từ bỏ quốc tịch VN như một số người lầm tưởng, và theo luật quốc tịch VN thì chúng ta chỉ mất quốc tịch khi có làm đơn xin và đơn xin từ bỏ quốc tịch của chúng ta đã được Chủ Tịch nhà nước chấp thuận. Chính vì thế mà giới chức ngoại giao Hoa Kỳ đã nhắc nhở các công dân gốc Việt cẩn thận khi về thăm VN vì chúng ta vẫn bị chính quyền Việt Cộng coi là vẫn còn quốc tịch Việt Nam.

Trên thực tế thì bọn Việt Cộng vẫn phân biệt người Việt hải ngoại với người Việt trong nước, chỉ khi nào bọn chúng muốn o bế, muốn chiêu dụ, bọn chúng mới chấp nhận người Việt hải ngoại có quyền như người Việt trong nước như trường hợp miễn thị thực (visa) cho Việt kiều nào muốn về nước tìm hiểu, làm ăn hay thăm quê hưong, du lịch bắt đấu từ 1/9/2007. Nhưng cũng chẳng ai ham vì tổn phí chẳng đỡ được bao mà lại phải làm đơn kèm giấy tờ chứng minh phiền phức, đó là chưa kể còn có thể bị mất quốc tịch sở tại vì phải làm đơn xin nhập quốc tịch VN (?).

Nay ngụy quyền Cộng Sản Việt Nam lại quay lại vấn đề song tịch của người Việt hải ngoại để thu hút tài chánh và chất xám của người Việt hải ngoại. Theo điều 3 luật Quốc Tịch VN 1998 thì Công dân VN chỉ có thể có một quốc tịch trừ trường hợp chính luật này quy định khác.

Và theo điều 13 của luật Quốc Tịch VN thì tư cách của những ngừơi VN sống ở nước ngoài nhưng chưa mất quốc tịch VN trong thời gian trước khi luật này có hiệu lực thì vẫn là công dân VN và được quyền mang hộ chiếu VN. Tóm lại, mặc dầu luật Quốc Tich VN chấp nhận nguyên tắc một quốc tịch, nhưng vì luật này không có hiệu lực hồi tố nên những người như những người Việt tỵ nạn chúng ta vẫn có 2 quốc tịch vì chúng ta rời bỏ đất nước trước ngày luật Quốc Tịch VN được ban hành tức trước ngày 1/7/2009.

Theo Hà Hùng Cường, Bộ Trưởng Tư Pháp Việt Cộng thì trong vòng 5 năm, kể từ ngày 1/7/2009 tức ngày luật Quốc Tịch VN có hiệu lực mà Việt kiều nào không làm thủ tục đăng ký xin giữ quốc tịch VN trong vòng 5 năm, sẽ bị mất quốc tịch VN. Tuy nhiên bất cứ lúc nào họ cũng có thể xin trở lại quốc tịch VN, tức xin hồi tịch, nếu có cha mẹ, vợ chồng hay con cái là công dân VN. Điều này chẳng qua là Việt Cộng muốn những người về làm ăn với Việt Cộng phải dứt khoát theo chúng.

Tới nay đã được 1 năm, có lẽ chúng thấy cũng chẳng có ai ngu dại mà đút đầu vào rọ, nên chúng lại đưa ra một quyết định khác là những người ngoại quốc gốc Việt Nam, muốn nhập cảnhViệt Nam không cần giấy nhập cảnh, nghĩa là chúng bỏ không cấp giấy nhập cảnh nữa, nhưng thay vào đó, phải làm giấy chứng minh gốc Việt Nam. Sự việc này, thoáng nghe thấy có vẻ giản dị hơn vì không cần xin giấy nhập cảnh, nhưng thực ra thủ tục này cũng chẳng khác gì thủ tục làm đơn xin giữ quốc tịch. Đây chẳng qua chỉ là cách chơi chữ của ngụy quyền Cộng Sản Việt Nam và một khi đã làm giấy chứng minh nguồn gốc của mình là người Việt Nam tức mình cũng có quốc tịch Việt Nam vì mình chưa hề xin từ bỏ quốc tịch Việt Nam. Như vậy mình sẽ phải chịu tất cả các rằng buộc bởi luật lệ Việt Nam và bọn Việt Cộng có thể bắt mình về tội trốn thuế đối với những người có công ăn việc làm, nhất là giới thương gia vì làm ăn với bọn Việt Cộng tham nhũng luôn luôn phải hối lộ, móc ngoặc với chúng. Mà một khi đã hối lộ mà lại muốn có lời thì phải tìm cách trốn thuế, gian lận, do đó, bất cứ lúc nào chúng muốn bắt tù, bắt tội cũng phải chịu.

Tóm lại, vấn đề quốc tịch của người Việt tỵ nạn Cộng Sản, chẳng có gì là rắc rối hay phức tạp. Không xin hồi tịch, không xin giữ quốc tịch, không làm giấy chứng minh gốc Việt Nam, dù có mất quốc tịch VN, chúng ta vẫn còn quốc tịch Hoa Kỳ hoặc quốc tịch của nước mà chúng ta định cư và đã xin nhập tịch. Khi về VN bất cứ vì lý do gì, nếu chẳng may dính tới luật pháp, chúng ta là công dân Hoa Kỳ hay một nước nào khác, chúng ta sẽ đưọc Hoa Kỳ hay nước chúng ta đã xin nhập tịch bảo vệ tích cực hơn. Chúng ta nên nhớ rằng chúng (Việt Cộng) cần chúng ta chứ không phải chúng ta cần chúng. Trái lại, nếu xin hồi tịch, xin giữ quốc tịch VN hay làm giấy chứng minh gốc Việt Nam tức đã đút đầu vào rọ của bọn Việt Cộng thì chỉ có từ chết đến bị thương, đừng mong gì khác.

Chúng ta chắc còn nhớ câu mà Tổng Thống Nguyễn Văn Thiệu nói:
    Đừng tin những gì Việt Cộng nói. Hãy nhìn những gì Việt Cộng làm.
Ai muốn đâm đầu vào rọ, cứ việc “thoải mái”.

Lê Duy San


Jail made me more angry, says defiant Assange

Sourcce: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/wikileaks/jail-made-me-more-angry-says-defiant-assange/story-fn775xjq-1225972690078


JULIAN Assange said today his nine days in solitary confinement in a British jail had made him angrier than ever and steeled his resolve to continue the WikiLeaks project.

"It has not altered my position, in fact it has confirmed my position to me personally that we are on the right path," he said on his release.

"It has given me enough anger about the situation to last me 100 years."

His strong rhetoric came just moments before entering the plush Ellingham Hall, his place of "mansion arrest" in the British countryside, after being granted conditional bail at the High Court in London.

Mr Assange is fighting extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations made by two women but said his major fear was being handed over to US authorities.

The 39-year-old Australian has become a hate figure in Washington over his website's release of thousands of secret US diplomatic cables containing embarrassing revelations.

"I do not have too many fears about being extradited to Sweden," he said.

"I have much bigger concerns about being extradited to the United States."

"We had a rumour today from my lawyer in the United States that there has been an indictment made against me in the United States. I have not had that confirmed."

Looking tired after being locked up for 23-and-a-half hours a day at Wandsworth Prison for the past week and a half, he said the US administration's attempts to bring down him and the WikiLeaks website were out of line.

"I think it is clear it is not a path that is acceptable to the world community," he said.

"Certainly not acceptable to the people of Australia or the people of Great Britain and to a large degree, not acceptable the people of Sweden as well, although the administrators are a different matter."

After being shut off from the world in jail, Mr Assange was informed he had a "good internet connection" to work with at the 10-bedroom residence owned by independent journalism campaigner and supporter Vaughan Smith.

"We have seen in my week away, my team is robust and we continue to publish in a successful manner ... that is not to underestimate the risks associated to all of us," Mr Assange said.

He is due back in court on January 11 for a case management session, with February 7 and 8 set down for his extradition hearing.

---------------------
    Julian Assange released, vows Wikileaks to fight on
Peter Wilson, Europe correspondent

Source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/julian-assange-released-vows-wikileaks-to-fight-on/story-e6frg6so-1225972511111



JULIAN Assange strode to freedom on the steps of the High Court in London and vowed his WikiLeaks website would fight on.

The 39-year-old Australian was released after nine days in the Victorian-era Wandsworth prison when the High Court said he should be granted bail while he resists extradition to Sweden on sex abuse allegations that he claims are a crude attempt to silence him.

After a day of uncertainty about his fate, Mr Assange and his legal team walked outside the court yesterday into a light snow storm on The Strand to address about 200 journalists from around the world.

"It's great to smell the fresh air of London again," he said.

"First, some thankyous. To all the people around the world who have had faith in me, who have supported my team while I have been away.

"To my lawyers, who have put up a brave and ultimately successful fight, to our sureties (bail guarantors) and people who have provided money in the face of great difficulty and aversion.

"And to members of the press who are not all taken in, and considered to look deeper in their work.

"And I guess finally, to the British justice system itself, where if justice is not always the outcome at least it is not dead yet.

"During my time in solitary confinement in the bottom of a Victorian prison I had time to reflect on the conditions of those people around the world also in solitary confinement, also on remand, in conditions that are more difficult than those faced by me.

"Those people also need your attention and support.

"And with that I hope to continue my work and continue to protest my innocence in this matter and to reveal, as we get it, which we have not yet, the evidence from these allegations."

Justice Duncan Ouseley rejected an appeal against Mr Assange's bail by Swedish authorities, who claimed if he was set free he might flee rather than face charges in Sweden that he allegedly committed four sex offences against two women in what began as consensual sexual encounters.

Justice Ouseley said one reason he believed Mr Assange was unlikely to abscond was that the allegations against him in Sweden did not seem to be "a cast iron case... so he has some prospects of success".

Evidence that one Swedish prosecutor felt there was no case against Mr Assange before another prosecutor disagreed and decided to pursue the matter suggested that the case "would be one that could be resisted by an innocent man," said Justice Ouseley.

Mr Assange denies the allegations of sexual abuse and insists the Swedish prosecution is a politically motivated attempt to stop his website from revealing US government secrets.

The internet publisher's release was delayed by a scramble to meet the court's demand for a £200,000 ($316,000) security payment and sureties from seven people who were prepared to stake their reputations and up to £20,000 of their own money on their confidence Mr Assange would not skip bail.

Mr Assange's legal team raced throughout the afternoon to meet those conditions before the close of business so their client would not be sent back for another night in solitary confinement, where he has been constantly monitored by infra-red cameras.

The providers of sureties included Australian journalist Phillip Knightley, publishing tycoon Felix Dennis, Nobel laureate for medicine Sir John Sulston, former British Labour spokesman on justice in the House of Lords Matthew Evans and academic Professor Patricia David.

The judge said he was worried that many of the people who had offered to back Mr Assange did not know him personally and were motivated by their support for his work with Wikileaks fighting for freedom of speech.

That raised the risk they might feel it would be "a righteous act" for Mr Assange to skip bail in order to continue his Wikileaks work, the judge said.

The judge's solution was to accept stringent bail conditions and a mix of sureties from the public figures who backed Mr Assange and from two personal friends, caterer Sarah Saunders and Vaughan Smith, a club owner in whose country estate Mr Assange will be obliged to live during his extradition hearings.

Mr Assange will have to wear an electronic tag and observe curfews of 12 hours each day while staying at Ellingham Hall, the mansion on Mr Smith's 600-acre property in Suffolk.

Mr Smith's home has ten bedrooms which are often rented out to visitors and members of hunting parties. Mr Assange will be paying for his lodgings and board, according to Mr Smith.

Mr Assange will have to report to police each day and he has surrendered his passport

The Obama Administration has made it clear it wants to take legal action against Mr Assange and his website, and it has been considering charges under the 1917 Espionage Act or other laws relating to his role in obtaining and publishing massive cashes of stolen US government cables.

Bradley Manning, a junior US military analyst, is in custody for having leaked the confidential cables and the Department of Justice is examining ways of linking Mr Assange to Mr Manning's alleged crimes.

The extradition case will resume on January 11 with two full days of hearings set down in early February. Legal experts say a European Arrest Warrant like that used against Mr Assange is highly likely to see him ultimately sent to Sweden but appeals could stretch the matter out for more than a year.



Law not broken by WikiLeaks' publication of US cables

Joe Kelly
Source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/wikileaks/law-not-broken-by-wikileaks-publication-of-us-cables-afp/story-fn775xjq-1225972735066


THE Australian Federal Police say they have not yet found any breach of Australian law in the leaking of US diplomatic documents published by WikiLeaks.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland said in a statement the government had received advice from the AFP on the matter, after police were asked to determine whether any illegality had occurred.

Mr McClelland noted that, on the information to date, the AFP has “not identified any criminal offences where Australia has jurisdiction and as a result have not commenced an investigation”.

Julia Gillard sparked an intense debate over whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had acted unlawfully after she earlier this month condemned the publishing of embarrassing US cables as “an illegal thing to do”.

Labor MPs in the left-wing parliamentary faction were enraged at the treatment of Mr Assange and demanded the government stop treating him as a criminal and protect his rights as an Australian citizen and whistleblower.

The Prime Minister today said she stood by her remarks, and again branded the publication of the cables “grossly irresponsible”, and repeated that “the theft of those documents is an illegal act”.

Mr McClelland said it had been “prudent” to examine whether any Australian laws had been broken.

“As has previously been stated, given the documents published to date are classified by the United States, the primary jurisdiction for any investigation into the matter remains the United States.

“The government remains extremely concerned about the unauthorised and irresponsible distribution of classified material.”

Mr McClelland warned, however, that the AFP “noted a number of offences which could be applied in the circumstances, depending on whether all the elements of the offence could be proven”.

The government's announcement follows the release on conditional bail in London early today of Mr Assange after nine days in prison.

The Australian founder of WikiLeaks is fighting extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations made by two women, but says his major fear is being handed over to authorities in the US, where there is widespread anger over the leaking of thousands of sensitive US diplomatic documents.

Ms Gillard today confirmed the AFP's findings but defended her own rhetoric in response to the publication of the confidential US cables.

The Prime Minister said she wanted to “clear up” what she described as some “conflation of what are different issues”.

She said that the government had made clear that Mr Assange would be provided consular assistance in fighting extradition.

But this was a separate issue to “theft of the documents”, and repeated her claim that “the theft of those documents is an illegal act”.

“That's properly in the hands of the US authorities to deal with,” she said.

Ms Gillard reaffirmed her view that the “release of all of this documentation has been grossly irresponsible and I stand by the remarks that I've made about this previously”.

“Whilst I know that there are times when people are whistleblowers, that is not the circumstance here, in my view, with WikiLeaks.

“This has been a wholesale release of information.

“There are some people who are fans of this conduct but I most certainly am not.

“The other side needs to be put, which is that, you know, I do believe that this conduct is irresponsible conduct.”

Ms Gillard also warned today that it was important not to make the “slip of suggesting that because something was written in a cable, it is a fact”.

She said confidential cables could identify people who provided information to governments who lived under oppressive regime and the publication of such documents could “have consequences”.

Australian revelations in the leaked cables include the fact that key Labor powerbroker and minister Mark Arbib was designated a “protected” US source who provided information on the inside workings of the government to US officials. Many other Labor figures were also designated “protected” sources and it is understood that the designation is simply given to ensure that information provided by these sources is not shared with other countries.

The cables also revealed the deep concerns held by the then prime minister Kevin Rudd over the international strategy in Afghanistan in 2008, sparking questions about whether these concerns should have been made public.

The cables also revealed that the former prime minister had warned the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in March 2009 that the world must be prepared to use force if Beijing could not be successfully integrated into the international community and that he was a “brutal realist on China”.


Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Aussie launches 'business version of WikiLeaks'

By Jane Lee
Source: http://www.news.com.au/business/business-owner/aussie-launches-business-version-of-wikileaks/story-e6frfm5i-1225972128310
    * Aussie retailer launches Tradeleaks.com
    * Users post anonymous tips about dodgy firms
    * Information on website is unreliable, says critic
AN AUSTRALIAN online electronics retailer has launched what he calls the business world's answer to WikiLeaks.

The site, Tradeleaks.com, allows internet users to post documents and tip-offs about dodgy business practices anonymously. Users can then rate and comment on the reliability of each leak.

Twenty-eight year old Ruslan Kogan, who featured on this year's BRW Young Rich list with a wealth of $29 million, made Tradeleaks.com available this morning.

A few hours after the website went live, there were ten allegations posted on the site about a mix of businesses and retailers.

'Fan' alleged that Foxtel* has an internal policy to offer one month’s free service to customers calling to "disconnect" their cable TV subscription.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related Coverage

* Inflation: Expectations fall

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
Business Owner Amex promo driver

Anonymous claimed that in his or her experience working at a "big TV retailer", he or she will: "play with the color (sic) settings on the TVs to ensure that the TVs that will earn us the most commission look better than the others."

"MY ADVICE TO CONSUMERS: If you are ever in a store buying a TV, ensure that you set all the color settings to "Factory Default" when comparing," said the post.

Mr Kogan said he hoped the site would eventually be filled with trade secrets and eventually become "bigger than WikiLeaks."

Mr Kogan denied that the website is an attempt to grab publicity for himself and his other businesses: "Someone could go on and post something [negative] about Kogan or my other business interests - we’re going to be judged on our transparency too… if it was [a publicity stunt] we’d put the Kogan logo on it."

"It's going to create a better shopping environment for consumers," Mr Kogan said.

"What this does is put all of the [internet’s business rumours and tip-offs] in one place; you're giving people one central place to say: 'I've worked here and here and they made me do this behind closed doors'," he said.

Mr Kogan said users can "post a leak" on the site directly in a system that will regulate itself, amid critics' warnings that there is no guarantee the information posted on the site is true or that its users’ personal details will be protected.

The site, which does not require a user name or evidence to back up claims, asks only that people "post credible information, including source documents where possible, which they believe consumers need to know."

"We put the power in the consumers’ hands, we let people decide what’s relevant and what’s not, whether they believe it or not..." he said.

"We’re not policing it and will only remove posts if they’re defamatory…you can post anything you want."

Asked what sort of security the site provided tipsters, Mr Kogan replied: “We’ve got legal firms and teams and we won't put up with personal attacks on anyone.

"We're encouraging people to provide evidence about claims - whatever they have we encourage them to upload it."

'This is no WikiLeaks'

Paul Ducklin, the head of technology for technical support firm Sophos' Asia-Pacific region, said that the website is no different to millions of existing internet forums that expose businesses to the risk of being slandered and their users to the risk of being identified.

"It is possible in all of this that innocent people could get slandered or libelled," Mr Ducklin said.

He contrasted Tradeleaks with WikiLeaks, which has a team of experts that decide when and whether to publish confidential information it has obtained.

"You have absolutely no idea who’s behind [the information on Tradeleaks], no indication of what’s going up and what’s not, there is no privacy policy," said Mr Ducklin.

"There's almost an anti-guarantee that people can post anything and we’ll publish it.

"[It's almost as if they are saying:] 'We don’t care what it is, we just ask you not to put naughty stuff up and it's up to others to remove it.'"