Friday, April 18, 2008

The Finnish National Bureau of Investigation yesterday released 600 pages of the 2,000 page final report into the Jokela school shooting. 18-year-old Pekka-Eric Auvinen opened fire at Jokela High School, killing eight before turning his gun on himself, receiving fatal wounds.

The remaining 1,400 pages of the report are to remain confidential. The public section reveals a number of problems that may have impacted on Auvinen’s decision to conduct the attack, but says that police failed to find any conclusive motive. Also released was an animation depicting events at the school.

The report says Auvinen had been bullied since the age of ten and concludes the extent of this problem was greater than previously thought. Auvinen suffered from anxiety and blushing, especially in lessons, and had been diagnosed with a panic disorder, for which he had been prescribed medication. Auvinen also suffered from sleep disorders and loneliness, and had few friends, although one former bully did go on to become a good friend of Auvinen’s. His mother said inability to settle on a suitable ideology contributed to Auvinen’s depression.

His parents had noticed and reacted to the bullying problem, but their intervention only served to worsen the situation. According to entries in Auvinen’s diary, he first began planning the shooting – which he gave the English name “Operation Main Strike” – about eight months prior to actually conducting the shooting.

Auvinen had told his mother that under certain circumstances he could approve of violence. He had often viewed web sites promoting violence and had a number of online contacts whom he discussed his ideas with. One of these was a United States teen arrested for planning a similar attack, and two others discussed the Columbine High School Massacre with him and traded videos they found online. However, there is no evidence he informed anyone of his plans until immediately prior to the attack.

The report called Auvinen a moderately good student, but noted his mental problems had impacted his performance at school. He had been interested in politics from an early age, being involved with the Centre Party, the Social Democratic Party, the Left Alliance, and the Finnish Communist Party.

“In the best case, this (attack) would create massive destruction and chaos, or even a revolution,” read one diary entry. “In any case, I want this to be remembered forever. Maybe I’ll even have a follower; after all, I am a super-person, almost God.” Another revealed he intended to “kill as many of you bastards as possible”. His diary also reveals he was aware he would be dead by the end of the attack.

He obtained a .22 calliber handgun which he named Catherine, having been denied a license for a 9mm gun, and submitted his plans online – including to YouTube – just 14 minutes prior to firing his first shots, having cycled to school. It was determined that, given the time-frame, there was little that could have been done by anyone who saw the material to prevent the attack. He fired 75 shots, 50 of which struck his eight fatally wounded victims, who were apparently chosen at random. Thirteen others were injured in the event.

The deceased were six students, the school headmistress and the school nurse. Auvinen shot at each several times in the region of the head and upper torso. He ultimately shot himself in the school toilet, and died in hospital from head wounds ten hours later, having never regained consciousness.

Police could not determine why he chose the date he did, although it was noted his online relationship with a foreign girl had ended just days before. It was also determined little could be done to predict and prevent future incidents, although one measure being sought is to require medical checks for gun licences and parental consent for prospective owners under 18.

The confidential section of the report discusses causes of death and police operations.

Sunday, May 7, 2006

Paris, France -Protesters marched denouncing the new copyright bill, known as DADVSI.Opponents to the bill contend that the broad civil and criminal penalties that it enacts in order to fight illegal online copying of copyrighted works will in fact have a chilling effect on a variety of unrelated developments, especially in free software. More than 160,000 people signed the anti-DADVSI petition from EUCD.info, a watchdog group fighting developments of the EU Copyright Directive.

The protest, uniting elected officials, representatives from computing and Internet organisations, political groups, and simple citizens, walked in a festive and peaceful atmosphere from the Place de la Bastille (site of the former royal prison) to the Ministry of Culture. It was organized by a variety of associations, including StopDRM, APRIL, Odebi league, Audionautes, various free software and Linux user groups, and sponsored by the French Communist Party and its young adult affiliate organisation, the youngs of the French Socialist Party, the youngs of the centrist Union for French Democracy, the young Greens. All the sponsors of this march are listed here. Depending on estimates, between 300 and 800 people marched, a low number by French standards.

The DADVSI law, among other issues, enacts an extensive protection of copyrighted content online and a protection of digital rights management techniques, including civil and criminal penalties for help in circumventing them. Opponents contend that the bill, depending on how it is amended in the French Senate, could in effect criminalise the writing of players compatible with new online distribution formats for music, video or even text, and thus make such content unplayable on systems such as Linux, thereby generating a monopoly for established suppliers.

Supporters of the bill, such as cinema and recording industry groups, contend that strong measures are needed to thwart online copying, which, according to them, is responsible for important losses of sales and revenue. They deny the risks for free software and other freedoms, claiming that, despite vague provisions, the law will be enforced wisely by the judiciary. They claim that new online legal commercial downloading platforms will flourish when peer-to-peer copying has stopped.

The bill is due to be examined in the Senate this week. Then, under the fast track procedure requested by the government, it may be signed into law by president Jacques Chirac after a mixed commission merges the text from the Senate and the lower house of Parliament, the National Assembly. Opponents have already indicated they would mount a constitutional challenge before the Constitutional Council. The bill, when it was examined by the National Assembly, proved divisive; the ruling UMP party was split on the issue, some even sponsoring a “legal licence” which would enable French Internet users to copy copyrighted content legally, provided they would pay a flat fee which would be split between the rights holder.

Protesters, as well as deputies from all parties, contend that major lobbies influenced the bill’s passage. Some amendments were nicknamed Vivendi Universal, from the name of a major record company that allegedly suggested it. Protesters recalled that Minister of Culture Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres was convicted of money laundering in 2004.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Columbia University President Lee Bollinger Wednesday jokingly named Bill Clinton to a professorship.

In opening remarks at the Kraft Program Series, “Challenges of New Democracies,” he said that “the last time he was here I said that ‘one more lecture,’ and he’d be up for tenure. So, this is it. Today we welcome professor Bill Clinton.”

Mr. Clinton and former Czech President Václav Havel were guest lecturers at the Morningside Heights campus. Havel is midway through a seven week writing residency at Columbia.

Both nations former leaders spoke about the challenges they faced during their times in office in order to bring the former Warsaw Pact countries into the West.

Havel mentioned that no one anticipated the rise of criminal mafias in the post-communist period, and that he and other dissidents imagined a swift transition from communism to democracy. He cited Czechoslovakia‘s 1948 destruction of civil society as a significant delay.

Clinton urged the United States to use its international economic power to improve the world.

Citing an even distribution of “intelligence and ability… throughout the world,” with India and China’s enormous population, he said that it’s only a matter of time when “other people get their act together” and “have more people than we do” when, “as a nation, we won’t be dominant.”

Acknowledging increasing American reliance upon Chinese economic growth, Clinton said the Chinese government will shortly have “a trillion dollars in cash reserves” while the United States has “a combined annual budget and trade deficit of a trillion dollars.”

Mentioning the Bush administration’s tax cut given to him and others in his income tax class, he said that the United States “had to borrow money from (the Chinese government) to pay for my tax cut.”

He also suggested that increasing American foreign aid to 0.7% of the U.S.’s $11 trillion Gross Domestic Product aid through cuts in the Department of Defense budget would “create a world with more partners and fewer adversaries.”

Mr. Bollinger also mentioned the war in Iraq.

Criticizing a “dubious construction of a very vaguely identified threat of WMDs in Iraq,” Mr. Havel questioned why planners failed to anticipate civil instability after initial combat operations.

Mr. Clinton declined comment citing his recent testimony before the Baker-Hamilton Commission and his wife Hillary’s position as New York senator. He added, however, that “whatever she says, I’m for.”

He acknowledged that it is an international best interest policy if Iraq “held together rather than falling apart, we would be better off if it had some measure of security and couldn’t become a base for terrorist operations.”