[bestbits] International civil society letter to Congress to follow up from HRC statement

Wed Jun 12 17:43:12 EDT 2013

Hi,

I think this is a good idea, but think it might be better as a paragraph at the  end, just before the signatures, so that the note starts strongly with the issue itself and not with us talking about ourselves.

avri

On 12 Jun 2013, at 17:37, Cynthia Wong wrote:

> One more suggestion from me, which I hesitate to add directly into the document since it is a question of self-identification. 
>  
> It would be useful to have a short description at the beginning of the letter that describes the kinds of organizations on the list, beyond the umbrella “civil society organizations.”  I realize this may be difficult depending on the diversity of sign-ons.  However, for example, it may be valuable to explain that many/some/all of the undersigned groups work to defend and promote human rights and access to an open Internet all around the world, or something similar. 
>  
> I only suggest this because this letter may go to members of congress that won’t have an understanding of the work that this community does.  It also helps to underscore that the USG’s programs have implications far beyond the narrow set of civil liberties that are usually the center of policy debates in the US. 
>  
> Thanks,
> Cynthia
>  
>  
> From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Carolina Rossini
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:37 PM
> To: joy at apc.org
> Cc: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> Subject: Re: [bestbits] International civil society letter to Congress to follow up from HRC statement
>  
> Hi Joy,
>  
> I just finished cleaning it up, but have kept the marked version just below the clean one.
>  
> Cynthia, feel free to edit the document directly with your suggestions.
>  
> 
> http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/your_name_here
>  
> I also have tried to incorporate Cynthia's suggestions.
>  
> C
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:08 PM, joy <joy at apc.org> wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> hi - can I check who is holding the pen on this draft at the moment? i
> am avialable to help but don't want to do anything as i am not sure
> where the drafting got to overnight....
> checking back on the emails now - but please let me know if you need help
> Joy
> On 13/06/2013 8:01 a.m., Kevin Bankston wrote:
> > Thanks Anriette.  It seems like people are OK with my proposal so I stuck it in the Pad (along with
> CDT's name as a signer).
> >
> > On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:45 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear all
> >>
> >> I think Anja puts it very well. Our letter will be part of a series of
> >> complimentary actions and we should feel comfortable with asking others
> >> from the Global South to sign on to it.
> >>
> >> Kevin I am happy with your language as well.
> >>
> >> What we do want to avoid in my view is to use language that will
> >> encourage readers to dismiss the message we try to get across as being
> >> crudely anti-US.
> >>
> >> Who is doing the next clean draft?
> >>
> >> I am happy to work on edits in the morning if needed.
> >>
> >> Anriette
> >>
> >> On 12/06/2013 21:25, Anja Kovacs wrote:
> >>> Dear Gene and all,
> >>>
> >>> As this statement is supposed to be one of international civil
> society, I
> >>> think it is important to retain that flavour - I don't think there is a
> >>> point in simply replicating what US civil society has had to say.
> >>>
> >>> This is my belief also because I don't see this intervention in
> isolation,
> >>> but as part of a broader engagement with US institutions, including with
> >>> the State Department, in which we attempt precisely to convey
> alternative
> >>> perspectives on core Internet issues, rather than simply feeding into an
> >>> agenda already set for us.
> >>>
> >>> I can see that in this particular statement, we would want to think
> >>> carefully about which concerns to highlight and how to frame them,
> so as to
> >>> provide as much support as possible to the current momentum. But I
> do think
> >>> there are certain non-negotiables if a wide sign up to this statement is
> >>> desired. For example, at last year's Best Bits meeting, we already had a
> >>> discussion on how few of us in the Global South use the term "Internet
> >>> freedom" to describe the work we do for a whole range of highly
> political
> >>> reasons and so I would think not using that term is one such
> >>> non-negotiable. As long as we take such issues into account, I am sure a
> >>> sound compromise can be reached that will make for a strong statement
> >>> acceptable to all.
> >>>
> >>> And I for one am happy with the framing suggested by Kevin on the
> >>> whistle-blowers issue, by the way.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and best regards,
> >>> Anja
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ------------------------------------------------------
> >> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> >> executive director, association for progressive communications
> >> www.apc.org
> >> po box 29755, melville 2109
> >> south africa
> >> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRuNUkAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqCYcIAK5Sy1Z6zBV4FOTYIPwy4G5v
> nEtLh9/Pkl5arqkUzpFsOYqr8zLE+epvy9eY9lrsXeEZgsPmPFgHeF8Ce8E/Pn0E
> VoNF/3WiUG3V0RlmZ6w7rwEcmadX5t4/6nbgkcUSTnbfWPLcsU5jKyjnSOZhkLbe
> wE72F42oyJOW2XvybwKr8eH4bTL/Kjc95qjY5X4bz32TAxrNdpKTdD5cZOyJAcNP
> RCtrJAiO7tQSAhQoBooQIK0Sj3cBOP0UV6U99fPvZ76rCRaCQCmiZ+CZMl6gyCNk
> tHv+e/1FOGZtBkJBMegSEmlZfVzHnj4ZHjNyfO3EO9BOjRe5MKWLicmOise6H0E=
> =OELq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Carolina Rossini 
> http://carolinarossini.net/
> + 1 6176979389
> *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
> skype: carolrossini
> @carolinarossini