Slashdot Mirror


Hosting Provider Shut Down By FBI

An Anonymous Reader writes: "An 80-strong U.S. FBI agents raided the Texas-based host of Arabic Web sites, including that of the Arab world's leading independent news channel, prompting charges on Thursday of an 'anti-Muslim witchhunt.'" The Reuters story is at Yahoo! as well. Did you know there was a North Texas Joint Terrorism Task Force, or that it would be shutting down ISPs?

88 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. CNN probably has stuff too by trance9 · · Score: 4, Interesting


    Imagine if an FBI raid on CNN resulting in the broadcaster going off the air for a few hours, or the website being shut down.

    I think there's some bias here.

    Sure, they probably have a search warrant. Sure, it's probably warranted. But this wouldn't be the first news organization had some information the police wanted or needed, and didn't hand it over. Journalists have these crazy ideas about protecting their sources, and don't always willingly give the police what they want.

    But still, if it were a western mainstream media organization the police would be careful not to disrupt operations.

    I think there must be some bias here.

    1. Re:CNN probably has stuff too by alannon · · Score: 2

      You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that web sites are afforded the same protections under the law that broadcasters are. They're not.

    2. Re:CNN probably has stuff too by Nonesuch · · Score: 2
      You are mistaken. Actually 'the press' has no special rights compared to other forms of media, just some extra political power to make a stink when their normal everyday rights are violated.


      IOW, the American government avoids pissing off the press, not because of any special legal protection, but more because of 'protection' in the cosa nostra sense of the word.

    3. Re:CNN probably has stuff too by djrogers · · Score: 3, Informative

      Obligatory reprimand follows :
      Next time read the article before you post. The news agencies weren't raided, their web hosting provider was. There's no indication of who the target of the warrant is, but it's highly unlikely that it's a foreign news agency... Sheesh...

      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
    4. Re:CNN probably has stuff too by autocracy · · Score: 2

      And what if CNN was hosted there? Yeah, you see his point now?

      --
      SIG: HUP
  2. They were *NOT* shut down. by torpor · · Score: 3, Troll

    Their operations were simply interrupted while the Fed's conducted their search. The sites came back online, fair and square.

    The search was perfectly legal, and executed per the law.

    For crying out loud, glib sensationalism is the last thing slashdot needs more of ...

    Shame!

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by eAndroid · · Score: 2

      What? Slashdot is ONLY glib sensationalism!

      --

      I can't spell or type, but that doesn't mean I'm unusually stupid.
    2. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by quintessent · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In other words:

      This article: Troll=1, misinformation=1, TypicalSlashdot=2

    3. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by Patrick13 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Actually, I think that if you read the Yahoo article carefully, it says
      "...many of the sites were able to start up again on other servers, while the task force continued to copy computerized information on Thursday. The office remained sealed off by FBI agents."


      Starting up on another server is not nearly the same as "coming back online, fair and square".
      --
      ::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
    4. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      No, radical Muslims target the US because
      the US is the current HQ of the Jewish-Masonic
      conspiracy that toppled the Ottoman Caliphate
      in 1918.

      I am not kidding. THis is what they believe.
      Ahmad Thomson's "Dajjal the Antichrist" is
      the book that goes into details about this
      conspiracy. Great reading, if you're stoned.

    5. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2

      No, radical Muslims target the US because
      the US is the current HQ of the Jewish-Masonic
      conspiracy that toppled the Ottoman Caliphate
      in 1918.

      Better live under a jewish-masonic rule than under strict islamic rule!
    6. Re:They were *NOT* shut down. by torpor · · Score: 2

      I'd rather live in a world where people knew how to deal with information/misinformation and didn't have to *rely* on special interests (press/etc) to make conclusions ...

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  3. Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Bonker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While the fourth amendment may not have been violated due to the fact that there was a valid search warrant, this kind of tactic sounds like classic 'silencing' to me. The warrant was sealed, right? Why were the offices raided? The quote in the reuters story from the owner indicated that he seemed to think that his news outlets were being targeted for being related to terrorist groups. There was *no* firm reason for the raid given.

    Sounds very totalitarian, doesn't it?

    As a Texan, I'm rather upset that we have a 'anti-terrorism force' at all! Hevean help me if I started to express anti-American views on my website!

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Nonesuch · · Score: 2
      There is a difference between speaking your mind and making trouble for others you stupid mother fucking piece of shit.

      Not according to the U.S. Bill of Rights. I believe you'll find it in Amendment 1, you totalitarianist fuckwit.

      Basically, that link (http://www.epic.org/free_speech/cohen.html) demonstrates that in the USA, "freedom of the press" and more generally "freedom of speech" is all but absolute.

    2. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by djrogers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Jeez, you even appear to have read the article, and you're still uninformed. The news agencies were not raided - their hosting provider was. A hosting provider that hosts hundreds of customers, including the arab news agencies mentioned... The warrant was sealed, meaning the press doesn't get told who the target of the search was, so the media tied the FBI angle to the arab news agency and let all the lemmings jump to wild conclusions....

      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
    3. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • Why were the offices raided

      A lonely post below makes the salient point that the Steve Jackson Games case set the precedent that unless the ISP itself was accused of a felony, the data should have been subpoenaed, not physically seized.

      Also, I'd be very interested to know why it takes 80 agents to raid a server farm. What were they expecting? "You can have my root password when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers"?

      So it looks like either the ISP itself was a hotbed of scum like terrorist, paedophles and hard core Linux users, or the FBI has (once again) got it badly wrong. As they have chosen to have no transparency or (immediate) accountability, I'm going to judge on their past behaviour and assume the latter.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    4. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • media tied the FBI angle to the arab news agency and let all the lemmings jump to wild conclusions....

      Why would the North Texas Joint Terrorism Task Force be raiding a server shop? Some of the articles are very clear in their statements. I know media types are notoriously hysterical, but when they're not sure about something, they tend to go hog wild on the "allegedlys".

      • Infocom Corporation was the target of the raid by the North Texas Joint Terrorism Task Force. Infocom runs computer Web sites for more than 500 companies around the world.
      • The government believes Infocom has ties to the Holy Land Foundation, which is located across the street.
      • The U.S. government has been investigating the Holy Land Foundation for some time, believing that it has ties to Hamas, a Palestinian organization which engages in terrorist activities against Israel
      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

      Oh, wait, here's another.

      • at least two US Islamic groups, including the Holy Land Foundation, across the street from Infocom, confirmed they have been served subpoenas for documents related to Infocom

      It now looks like the gubmint reckons that the ISP is primarily a front for the Holy Land Foundation, not a common carrier. Interesting case, interesting precedent.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by saider · · Score: 2

      Also, I'd be very interested to know why it takes 80 agents to raid a server farm. What were they expecting? "You can have my root password when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers"?

      Its all about law enforcement ego. Everyone wants a piece of the action, so everyone goes on the raid. That's how they validate their budgets and promotions. I gaurantee that 70 of them were standing around in their bullet-proof vests and sidearms sipping a latte for six hours after the initial entry.

      Begin silly anecdote. A friend of mine witnessed this firsthand some years ago. While working for a company that investigates accident claims for insurance companies, he was called to the scene of a boat fire. The sherrif detectives were already on the scene. Shortly afterwards, the marine patrol investigators (state police) showed up because the fire was on a boat in the water and hence in their jurisdiction. All these investigators were walking around with clipboards and cameras. Then comes walking in the BATFAgs - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Agents, carrying clipboards, fancy cameras, and their sidearms. Well, everyone got in each other's way until lunch, when they went their separate ways - except for the sherrif who got the job of watching the scene. Upon returning from lunch, the sherrif investigators were now armed and the marine patrol investigators were now armed. Coupled with the fact that most of the company investigators were legally carrying concealed weapons (in Florida its OK if you have a permit), my friend was looking at a fairly volitile situation, should some kid decide to light some firecrackers. Keep in mind that police are not neseccarily good shooters as evidenced by the Waco fiasco where several agent wounds were either self-inflicted or inflicted by fellow agents.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    7. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > It now looks like the gubmint reckons that the ISP is primarily a front for the Holy Land Foundation, not a common carrier. Interesting case, interesting precedent.

      Has anyone stopped to ponder the possibility that this might be true? (Even a stopped clock is right twice a day ;)

      Depending on how careless they were, a bit of amateur poking around at DNS records could even establish connections between the ISP and Holy Land. The skills required to establish this aren't much different from those required to track down spammers.

      Speaking of whom, have we forgotten an "ISP" called "Telodigm" which existed only as a front for a certain spammer's ongoing spamming operations for a certain questionable diet product, for the better part of a year?

      And speaking from my own experience, during the first days of the Kosovo conflict, I received (and reported) spam coming from Yugoslavian sites, but relayed through sites located in North America. The sites were set up by various anti-US organizations. In one case, the upstream's homepage revealed that it was most certainly not an ISP, but an activist site. (Needless to say, that spam didn't get reported to the "ISP", as they were clearly complicit in the network abuse.)

      That's not to say there was anything necessarily illegal about these sites or those operating them -- but the geographical locations of the organizations in the DNS records were, to say the least, interesting. (One was registered to an address a few blocks away from a bunch of embassies. What a strange place from which to run an ISP, no?) While I don't have network logs to bear me out, I would not be at all surprised to find that some of these sites tacitly supported (through open SOCKS proxies, for instance) some of the cracking attempts on .mil and .int networks that was reported during this timeframe.

      From where I sit, I have no evidence. Anyone who's followed my postings knows I don't have any trust for the Feebs. But even I at my most paranoid, I am open to the possibility that maybe they knew something we don't. And maybe that was enough to convince a judge. And maybe the judge didn't just rubber-stamp the warrant. And maybe what happened in Texas was a good thing.

      The public sites are up on other providers - apart from a couple hours of downtime, I see little First Amendment risk.

      Whatever may (or may not) have happened behind the scenes at this ISP is being archived for use in a trial. The trial will be held in public, and if there is something wrong, there should be plenty of non-classified evidence that can be put into the record. I'm willing to wait for the trial to make up my mind.

    8. Re:Can you say 'Freedom of Press'? by mpe · · Score: 2

      lso, I'd be very interested to know why it takes 80 agents to raid a server farm.

      Maybe they are practicing for an overdue raid on a software company run by known criminals...

  4. I guess this means the cold war _is_ over. by GiMP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have heard of this Arab newstation before. I saw a story about it on american television, I forget which channel.. perhaps BBC-america.

    The arab governments have fears that it may bring democracy.. well, not all of them. The newstation is located in Jordan. The prime-minister of Jordan, on this television documentary I watched admitted that the coming of democracy would be good and supported the efforts of this news station.

    I can not see how their website was breaking American law, although they may have been breaking laws in other countries.. which shouldn't matter if it is hosted in the USA. The most the Arab countries should be able to do, imho, is to arrest the runners of this newstation.

    Of course, the Arab government are afraid to do anything because they would be making martyrs of the procecuted.. I guess that is why they had the USA do the dirty work for them :(

    This is the first direct sign that the USA is turning it's heels on democracy. This is the first time that the USA has tried to dissolve protesters cries of their corrupt, non-democratic government.

    1. Re:I guess this means the cold war _is_ over. by zenyu · · Score: 2, Insightful


      This is the first direct sign that the USA is turning it's heels on democracy. This is the first time that the USA has tried to dissolve protesters cries of their corrupt, non-democratic government.

      Wha? Um, didn't the US prop up the Shah of Iran, and continue to oppose the populist replacement? Didn't the USA force Fidel to side with the communist because of some sugar plantation interests? Did the 80's in Latin America happen? Didn't we kill 100,000 Filipino's trying to win independence from the US of A?

      First my ass, the US will squash democracy anywhere it might oppose the interests of the empire.

      The cold war rheotoric just made it imprudent to behave badly in public, now we have extraconstitutional "anti-terrorism" and "anti-drug" measures, and we're working on killing anonymous speech too. Can't leave a wrong word unpunished.

  5. CLEAR media bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If it were a jewish ISP being shut down then this would be all over the news.

  6. FBI claims no bias by firewort · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, this is an interesting situation:

    We have the FBI, who I don't trust.
    We have the Arabic news sources, who I also don't trust.

    The FBI is denying any kind of bias whatsoever, and that the investigation is totally unrelated to terrorist concerns, anti-palestinian, anti-muslim, or anti anything else.

    Still, until we have any better information (which I'm looking forward to) this amounts to a very short period of Government sponsored hacktivism (okay, it's arguable how much hacktivism is involved when the G-men come in and take you offline, but it's the same result as geeks taking down opressors and terrorists sites on the other side of the world.)

    --

  7. What's good for the goose is good for the gander by TWR · · Score: 2, Interesting
    A radical Hindu web site had its access taken away for good due to complaints by Muslim groups, and nary a Slashdot story on it, or any gnashing of teeth by those defenders of free speech at iViews.


    I guess it's OK for Muslim complaints to take out a Hindu web site, but it's not OK for federal investigation to shut down some Muslim web sites for a few hours.


    BTW, the Hindu web site found hosting again on a server run by a militant Jewish group. The New York Times ran a story on it a few months ago; it's funny what strange bedfellows these sorts of things can make.


    I expect this will be modded down to about -200 in a few minutes...interesting how the truth can do that.


    -jon

    --

    Remember Amalek.

  8. local news links by Emrys · · Score: 5, Informative
    Since people are mentioning lack of real detail on the "why" of the raid, and I live down here in Dallas, I guess I'll be a karma whore:

    http://www.wfaa.com/wfaa/articledisplay/0,1002,310 13,00.html
    http://www.wfaa.com/wfaa/articledisplay/0,1002,311 20,00.html

  9. Deja Vu All Over Again by 1alpha7 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This reminds me so much of the Steve Jackson Games raid of a decade ago. Yes, the warrant was valid. And sealed. The effect was to nearly silence a voice the SS didn't like.

    1Alpha7

    --
    Live to be Moderated
    1. Re:Deja Vu All Over Again by 1alpha7 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Mind posting a link?

      Sorry, guess that would be nice. Here ya go

      --
      Live to be Moderated
  10. The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And the search was probably justified. Muslim
    terrorist groups use fronts disguised as charities
    to move money around, and the Holy Land Foundation
    has long been suspected of being a financial front
    for Hamas. Since HLF uses the Web to collect
    donations by way of credit cards, a search of the
    Web hosting company is legit.

    1. Re:The sites are back up. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2

      And the search was probably justified. Muslim
      terrorist groups use fronts disguised as charities
      to move money around, and the Holy Land Foundation
      has long been suspected of being a financial front
      for Hamas. Since HLF uses the Web to collect
      donations by way of credit cards, a search of the
      Web hosting company is legit.

      Jewish business groups use fronts disguised as charities to funnel money into the state of israel, which then uses it to bully it's neighbours in the middle-east.

      Double standard again; the american jews have money, and the american arabs don't. So guess which side the US is leaning towards???

    2. Re:The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      Israel's assassinations are targeted at high officials of organizations like Hamas. Hamas's assassinations are targeted at any Jew. In 1967, Israel was under a naval blockade when she attacked. The settlement policy is meant to ensure that a Palestinian state would not be used as a stepping stone to Israel's destruction, as listed in the PLO's Conquest by Stages plan of 1974. And Syria is on the list. Israel is not a girl scout on its own. Israel is a girl scout compared to her neighbors.

    3. Re:The sites are back up. by CokeBear · · Score: 2

      Artifical State?
      Most states are artificial. Most borders are manmade. (Except the ones that are rivers or other natural barriers)

      --
      Reality has a liberal bias
    4. Re:The sites are back up. by LordNimon · · Score: 3, Informative
      compared to her neighbors, Israel is a girl scout.

      It's obvious you have been fooled by Jewish propaganda. Example: did you know that Israeli forces back in April destroyed a bunch of olive trees that provide the only source of income for a village in Palestine? They claimed it was for security, but what kind of threat are a bunch of farmers? Just read this: http://www.proactivist.com/opinion/dispatches_isra el_4-2-01.html.

      The United States would be way better off if we distanced ourselves from Israel and befriended the Palestinians instead. This Islamophobia is getting out of hand.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    5. Re:The sites are back up. by mpe · · Score: 2

      Most countries actually have a policy of assassination that they try not to trumpet. The U.S. is actually one that has an official no-assassination policy in effect (for all the
      good it does).


      What makes you think this "policy" is any more good faith than a great many treaties the US has with the rest of the world?
      Maybe the real policy is more one of "don't get caught".

    6. Re:The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      Do you know of a site with credit card
      processing to funnel money to Jewish
      terror groups? If so, phone the FBI.

    7. Re:The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      What kind of threat are a bunch of farmers,
      you ask? Depends. Usually the grove cuttings
      are done in response to sniper activity.

      And if you think cutting olive groves is
      severe, you don't know the Middle East.

    8. Re:The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      The assassinations would not be okay in
      a country with a functioning legal system.
      Under the conditions Israel is in, there
      is no functioning legal system.

      And there is a difference between killing
      an official of a terrorist group and killing
      any poor schmuck of the wrong ethnic group.

    9. Re:The sites are back up. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      That is still angelic by world standards.

  11. Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande by Steve+B · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I expect this will be modded down to about -200 in a few minutes...interesting how the truth can do that.


    Where's the "-1: Self-Indulgent Posing" option?

    --
    /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
  12. Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande by Apuleius · · Score: 2

    The site involved was hinduunity.org.

  13. Stop the FUD. by Rothfuss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The talk of *BIAS* is ridiculous spincasting by the media and by people that like to constantly complain about persecution. The FBI serves warrants and searches businesses all the time. That's part of their job, like it or not. They don't sit around a water cooler and say "Let's go raid some Moslem businesses this week...that'd be a hoot. We don't like Moslems."

    Come on - that's just stupid. They're working an investigation and this is where it brought them. There are NO details in either article...just journalists looking for a story they can blow out of proportion. If it had been a warehouse where large quantities of twine is stored by a couple of surly old kansas natives it wouldn't have even made the news. No FUD value. That kind of thing happens every week.

    -Rothfuss

    1. Re:Stop the FUD. by notext · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're working an investigation and this is where it brought them. There are NO details in either article...

      The reason there are no details in either article is the fact that they give no details. The warrant is sealed. They haven't said why they are searching the stuff or what they are searching for.

      Thats what makes this a unique case. The would have to arrest me to search my stuff without giving me a reason they were searching it or what exactly they were searching for, because I sure as hell wouldn't let them do it.

  14. Holy Zork! by anticypher · · Score: 2, Funny

    They've shut down Infocom.

    You are in a maze of twisty passages, all alike. It is dark, if you proceed, you are likely to be eaten by a grue.

    xyzzy AC

    --
    Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
  15. sealed warrant? wtf? by bat'ka+makhno · · Score: 4, Troll
    What bothers me the most is the continuous stream of legal obfuscation perpetrated by government agencies. How many times in the past couple of years have we heard of defense lawyers denied critical information allegedly out of "greater state interest." Some guys who were allegedly linked to the World Trade Center bombing were kept in jail, without being charged, for several years, until even the DA or whoever decides those things decided not to prosecute the case, since the government just didn't have one.

    What kind of shit is this? If you're going to be violating people's property and impeding commerce, you'd better have a damn valid reason that will stand up to public scrutiny. Otherwise, we might as well get rid of trial by jury, the pesky fifth amendment or the obligation to prove one's guilt before issuing a sentence. Yeah, that's the ticket, just like in those documentaries about the Third Reich that must be the talk of the town in Quantico nowadays.

    This makes me sick.

    1. Re:sealed warrant? wtf? by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      There are myriads of ways to keep a person as a polotical prisoner or to harass/torment them legally here in the USA. If you have enough money to spend on court costs and fees you can have anyone you want imprisioned. Hell a woman only has to just say a man raped her to get him in jail with a red R on his forhead for life, they dont require evidence. Accuse someone of Sexual harassment to get them easily fired at any workplace in the USA... no evidence required here either.

      If you have the money you can bend the law to follow your agenda.... justice and what is right is not an issue or important in the United States.

      (to remind everyone.. I live in the USA, and am appaled at our completely corrupt govt.)

      Oh and to make the feminatzi's back off.. I believethat if a man actually rapes a woman he needs to have his thing chopped off... publically mulitated would be better. and real sexual harassment needs to be dealt with harshly... but far far too many women take this power and abuse it... (and men too!)

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  16. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by smack.addict · · Score: 2
    Get a fucking grip. It is people like you who make middle east peace impossible.


    Now, I am about as pro-Palestinian as things get. But your rhetoric of racism and Zionism is nauseating. Yes, Israel is a fake country plucked out of Palestinian land. But that was 50 years ago. Israel exists and is populated with people who view themselves as Israeli.


    The challenge is to carve up fair and equitable borders between the two countries. This is an extremely difficult challenge. The alternative, however, is mutual destruction. So stop whining about irrelevancies.

  17. Protection from vicious electrons by Futurepower(tm) · · Score: 2


    I'm glad that we have police forces to protect us from those vicious electrons, that so frequently get out of control and become destructive.

    --
    Bush's education improvements were
  18. What amazes me... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...is that the Muslim community in this country actively supported George W. Bush in the presidental campaign because they were scared of Gore's choice of Lieberman. However, when you look at the record and the campaign statements, Bush continually expressed views that were anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian, while both Gore and Lieberman were clearly on the side of following Clinton's aggressive stance on helping the peace agreement. And they're surprised that the FBI, under an Attorney General who holds some really antiquated political views, have taken these actions.

    Frankly, this doesn't surprise me. George W. Bush and his administration have no problem with you being a different skin color, economic/social class, sexual orientation, etc. as long as you act like them. I'm not saying the Dems are better, but at least there's some indicator from them that you don't have to goosestep to their march exactly the way the Republicans do...

    I'm seriously thinking of moving to Canada until the Shrub presidency is over if this type of action is going to become commonplace. I definitely don't want to raise my children (who will be European/Filipino) in an environment that the Bush Clan seems to think ideal if that environment means silencing dissent and allowing banks to close accounts based on religious views...

    1. Re:What amazes me... by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 2

      Care to name some of those "anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian" views, or maybe even back up your "goose-stepping" crack by explaining what you think Republicans have in common with the National Socialist Workers Party?

      Oh, and if Canada is fool enough to take you, buh-bye...

      Back on topic: curious how only the local news site mentioned the Hamas connection that is the target of the FBIs search. Rather important detail for the nationals to omit, isn't it?

    2. Re:What amazes me... by elefantstn · · Score: 2

      This post was just like some of my essays in junior high. I had no idea what I was talking about, so I just wrote for paragraphs on things that would be interesting if true, but had no true bearing on reality whatsoever. I mean, where to start? There's not much to disagree with, it's just paragraph after paragraph of counterfactual statements.


      As other posters above have noted, Clinton's stance towards the peace agreements was not "aggressive," it was just trying to put a good face on negotiations that were quickly falling apart.


      but at least there's some indicator from them that you don't have to goosestep to their march exactly the way the Republicans do...

      Oh really. Try being a pro-life Democrat. The late Bob Casey, former governor of Pennsylvania, spent decades in service to the Democratic party, but was never given a chance to speak at the Democratic convention because of his pro-life views. In my opinion, one of the sad realities of American politics today is that the left has become just as reactionary as the right, willing to ostracize a person who holds unorthodox views on "liberal" issues as quickly as Pat Robertson would a homosexual. There is no liberal, progressive party in this country - those who label themselves "liberal" are as close-minded as their extremist counterparts.

      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
  19. Some big differences by L-Train8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Hindu Unity website incident is a very different situation. The site had some strong anti-Muslim views, particularly towards Muslims in India. Stuff that could be interpereted as a call for violence against Muslims in India (the current home page has a cartoon of Muslims stabbing to death a Hindu mother). And people complained to the ISP, who told the organization to take their business elsewhere. Here is an article.

    The case of the ISP in Texas involves the government shutting down, albeit temporarily and as an incidental consequence of searching for evidence, lots of websites without explanation, only a sealed warrant. This includes one of the most prominent sites news of the middle east that is not controlled by a government of the region.

    People get up in arms about controversial websites, like porn sites, hate sites, spammer sites, radical anti-abortion sites, etc, all the time. And sometimes, complaints to the ISP are effective in forcing the site to move to an ISP that is less concerned about complaints from the public. That isn't really news.

    The government shutting down 500 mostly arab-related websites without explanation should be considered more newsworthy.

    --

    Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
    1. Re:Some big differences by TWR · · Score: 2
      People get up in arms about controversial websites, like porn sites, hate sites, spammer sites, radical anti-abortion sites, etc, all the time. And sometimes, complaints to the ISP are effective in forcing the site to move to an ISP that is less concerned about complaints from the public. That isn't really news.


      Now, I haven't checked to see exactly which sites were taken down temporarily, but there are several Muslim organizations in the US who raise money for groups that US government considers terrorist groups. That's illegal.


      My guess is that at least one of the web sites falls into this category. We're not talking about sites that preach hate and violence, we're talking about sites that finance it. I'm not saying that every Muslim web site or organization is hateful or violent or whatever, but they do exist.


      By your standards, this shouldn't be news, then.


      -jon

      --

      Remember Amalek.

    2. Re:Some big differences by TWR · · Score: 2
      Same actions performed by an Israeli state would of course not be considered terrorist, due to their political alignment to the US, and are in fact, supported.


      Oh, you're full of shit.


      Are you familiar with Kach and Kahane Chai? They are radical Jewish groups who preach that Israel needs to throw every Arab out of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.


      Israel has banned them as illegal terrorist groups and the US government considers them to be terrorist groups. There have been arrests and the FBI gathering evidence from JDL servers as evidence that the JDL is providing funds to Kach and Kahane Chai. Once again, not news on Slashdot. It's the JDL which is partnering with HinduUnity, BTW.


      If the major Arab news source is so poorly set-up that they only have a single hosting point, then gee, this sort of thing is going to happen. What's the next Slashdot/iViews headline: "Zionist Racist Backhoe Takes Out Islamic Voice on Internet"?


      -jon

      --

      Remember Amalek.

  20. It shouldn't amaze you. by Apuleius · · Score: 2

    Jewish-Muslim relations are strained because for centuries these relations were dictated by Sharia Law, which placed Jews in a submissive position. A good portion of the Muslim community of the US regards Jews as if they (well, we) have cooties, and this won't change any time soon. At least since the US has never been under Sharia, Muslims and Jews can try to build relations that are not based on Sharia. The Mideast, however, was under Sharia law, and there are fatwas that explicitly forbid having equality with Jews in the region. Since Jews won't settle for less than equality nowadays, the Mideast is a hot potato.

    1. Re:It shouldn't amaze you. by denshi · · Score: 2
      I saw a fantastic film last year about youth in Lebanon (Beirut). I forget the name. The killer line was when one elderly Arab said something to the effect of 'the Arabs used to be a great and learned people. What happened to us.' This while standing in the ruins of Beirut (thank you, Israel and Syria).

      Much as you keep bringing up the Sharia, I do not think that is a complete answer. The last thousand years has seen a thorough collapse of Arab culture. Laws and traditions formed at the height of Arab civilization no longer serve, nor are they even well implemented. Add all the oil wealth, and you have a familiar pattern of a sadly uneducated redneck culture that has just recently come into a great deal of prestige and power -- a sure receipe for screwing a place up. These disputes aren't the result of any coherent religious position, just the old, sad inevitabilities of ignorant hate in rapidly changing cultures.

      OTOH, the Israelis could stop, you know, killing a dozen Arabs in retaliation for each Israeli death. That's certainly no way to make friends.

  21. Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande by TWR · · Score: 2
    As others have pointed out, the name of the site is HinduUnity.org. Visit their web site if you want details. If you want to read the whole article, you can do a search for HinduUnity on the New York Times web site. It'll cost you to read it, though, as it was published over a month ago. Like I said, no outcry from the Slashdot free speech squad.


    I'm not a Hindu and some what HinduUnity.org preaches scares the heck out of me. But it shouldn't be forced off its ISP by crybabies. I just can't stand the hypocritical posturing.


    -jon

    --

    Remember Amalek.

  22. Re:Supporting Evidence by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    Since my original post was immediately modded to -1 by biased moderators, I thought I'd post again to provide some links to further information.

    Radio Free Nation had a quick story on this about lunch time.

    Since they are a political site, they may be more appropriate for this sort of discussion.

    They may even welcome an article if you put something up that is well thought out and coherantly argued.

    - - -
    Radio Free Nation
    an alternate news site using Slash Code
    "If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  23. The Hacker Crackdown by sammy+baby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For all kinds of great info on this topic, read The Hacker Crackdown, by Bruce Sterling. The entire text is available on the web all sorts of places. Like here, for instance. It's an excellent book.

  24. Why is it that... by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

    An 80-strong U.S. FBI agents raided the Texas-based host of Arabic Web sites, including that of the Arab world's leading independent news channel, prompting charges on Thursday of an 'anti-Muslim witchhunt.'

    Why is it that every time the government does something bad to (e.g. raids) something that is owned primarily by minorities (e.g. Muslims), the victims cry racism? I'd be ignorant to think that it doesn't happen at all, but this is just plain ridiculous. It seems to me that they are just looking for a scapegoat -- the FBI didn't raid us because of our [p0rn || warez || etc.], they raided us because of our [race || religion || etc.]! Give me a break. IMO people like this need to grow up and realize that not everything bad that happens to them is because of their minority status.

    --

    I pledge allegiance to the flag...
    of the Corporate States of America...
    1. Re:Why is it that... by dangermouse · · Score: 2
      Note that you immediately assumed that the raid was probably conducted because of the target's "[p0rn || warez || etc.]" and not because of their "[race || religion || etc.]".

      You also immediately drew a connection between the people involved here and some you've apparently heard about elsewhere who "cry racism" unjustly and on a regular basis.

      My point is that you've hardly shown yourself to be above the sort of instant-conclusion reaction that you attribute to the people involved here.

      Also, considering the United States government is (right now) boycotting the UN's World Conference Against Racism, it's not an entirely unreasonable charge to level against said government at the moment.

      I suspect a bit more research is in order before anyone draws any further conclusions here.

    2. Re:Why is it that... by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

      Also, considering the United States government is (right now) boycotting the UN's World Conference Against Racism, it's not an entirely unreasonable charge to level against said government at the moment

      There's a reason why they're boycotting that though. As you may have heard, this convention denounces Israel as a racist state (I don't remember the specifics, but that's the main part of it). The US representatives do not agree with this, and they feel strongly enough about the issue that they are willing to boycott the convention. Some other countries are boycotting the convention too because of this, IIRC. I don't know a whole lot about Israel, but I've heard much worse about other countries as far as how they treat outsiders.

      Note that you immediately assumed that the raid was probably conducted because of the target's "[p0rn || warez || etc.]" and not because of their "[race || religion || etc.]

      Point taken. But the FBI doesn't just choose who to raid at random...do they? *Something* had to have been going on there to get the FBI's attention. As you said, more research is in order here.

      --

      I pledge allegiance to the flag...
      of the Corporate States of America...
    3. Re:Why is it that... by LordNimon · · Score: 2

      I can assure you that if the conference had labelled any of the Arab countries as a "racist, apartheid state", the U.S. would not have walked out.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    4. Re:Why is it that... by Rupert · · Score: 2

      Where you are allowed to live in Israel depends on whether you are palestinian or not. Sounds like institutional racism to me.

      Personally I think the US should stop mailing checks to Israel until they sort the whole thing out. Give them a bit of incentive.

      --

      --
      E_NOSIG
    5. Re:Why is it that... by dangermouse · · Score: 2
      There's a reason why they're boycotting that though. As you may have heard, this convention denounces Israel as a racist state (I don't remember the specifics, but that's the main part of it). The US representatives do not agree with this, and they feel strongly enough about the issue that they are willing to boycott the convention.


      That's not entirely true. This conference recognizes a problem of racism in Israel, and would like to work toward a solution. The language has become increasingly mild and conciliatory toward Israel as the preparations and the conference itself have gone on. In point of fact, the United States walked out before Israel did!


      There is also a very large contingent at the conference (including an African bloc and many US NGOs) who believe that the U.S. is using the Israel/Palestine issue as a smokescreen because it doesn't want to discuss the possibility of declaring the trans-Atlantic slave trade to have been a crime against humanity, and is avoiding the issue of reparations for said crime altogether.


      Europe and Africa seem to have been squaring off on that issue, but none of those countries boycotted the WCAR.

  25. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by Squid · · Score: 2

    Fat chance. The problem isn't that you have to divide up Israel fairly and equitably - the problem is that there's a couple of major religions born there. The followers of those religions are of the opinion (delusion) that God has promised that land to THEM - so it is therefore their sacred duty to occupy that land and throw out the followers of those Other Religions because they're obviously working for Satan.

    I don't think the situation will ever be resolved.

  26. Get a life by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 2
    Slashdot self-hate is getting really tedious. Why the hell would anyone mod up this pointless comment? It's like all the fucking comments that just say "of course, ignorant slashdotters will mod this down, but I'll say it anyway." As though baseless self-critique is somehow a purifying influence, or puts you people above the Masses.

    It's disturbing that not only do so many commenters have a negative opinion of slashdot, but moderators think empty criticisms like this are actually worth points. If you have criticism that isn't just glib, go ahead, but otherwise if you don't like it just go the fuck away or keep it to yourself. And please don't encourage this shit by moding it up!

    I usually don't swear, and I usually don't like the "if you don't like it, go away" response, but the pretentions of these sorts of posts piss me off. They remind me of high school and the all the idiots who thought they were cool because they insulted everything and everyone.

  27. Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande by slamb · · Score: 2

    I'm not a Hindu and some what HinduUnity.org preaches scares the heck out of me. But it shouldn't be forced off its ISP by crybabies

    "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." - A.J. Liebling.

    As I understand it, the supreme court has pretty much ruled consistently with this quote. If you own a press, you can say anything that isn't libelous or obscene. If you don't own a press, you are guaranteed nothing. No one is required to help you say what you want. [*]

    So, yes, sites like HinduUnity.org should be forced off their ISPs. They have a constitutional right to say what they want, but no one is required to provide them a forum to spread their hatred.

    [*] - I believe there is an exception for "common carriers" - basically if you are the only game in town. This would be a huge backbone provider, not a small ISP. It wouldn't apply here.

    (Keep in mind, the legal details here are all from memory. If someone has an authoritative link, please post it.)

  28. Re:PLEASE SUPPORT OPEN SOURCE GNUHAIKU!!! by Panaflex · · Score: 2

    How can it be racist if both sides are hateful of the other. More like mutual hate.

    1. I find it hard to live next to anybody that would publically tell children on freaking SESAME STREET to go and kill me.

    2. If I were palistenian, I would refuse to work for jews that looked upon me as inferior and shuffled my family about like cattle.

    In other words, I find no one in the middle east has any brains at all.

    We all know various histories of the areas. There is no excuse for any of it. Both peoples have a fervent hate that is based on intolerance.

    Tolerance is the core of freedom. The middle east will never be free until people learn to accept each other.. NO POLITICAL SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE. I do not mean that palestinians need to go to temple, and vice versa. I mean that people are free to practice their religion next door. Whether you like them or not.

    Who wins the spiritual battle? Certainly not Allah or God.

    Panaflex

    --
    I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
  29. They also ran the IQ (Iraq) TLD by Skapare · · Score: 2

    They also ran the IQ (Iraq) TLD as seen here. The day of the RAID, the DNS went down on the primary server. It appears to be back up now.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  30. Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande by TWR · · Score: 2
    So, yes, sites like HinduUnity.org should be forced off their ISPs. They have a constitutional right to say what they want, but no one is required to provide them a forum to spread their hatred.


    Legally, you are absolutely correct. I'm talking morally, though.


    HinduUnity's words condemn them. Muslim groups that want to shut them down, and force them off of their servers provide evidence for their paranoia. It also drew a lot more attention to them.


    Leaving them alone would have been best, but these idjits just couldn't _stand_ to have something somewhere that they found offensive. Substitute "porn" or "Howard Stern" or "neo-Nazi" or whatever for "Hindu Unity" and you'll get the idea.


    Like I said, people piss and moan when something happens to a site they agree with but shrug their shoulders when it is something they don't agree with. Well I'm pissing and moaning even when I don't agree with it. And I don't think taking a bunch of sites down for a few hours while the FBI collects evidence is nearly as big of a deal as mob action against unpopular opinions. But that's just me.


    -jon

    --

    Remember Amalek.

  31. Child pornography? by coyote-san · · Score: 2

    Since the warrant is sealed, we shouldn't be too quick to jump to the conclusion that the raid is somehow directed at the Muslim clients. If it is, we can be outraged when the truth comes out. If it is not, we're just reinforcing the stereotype that Muslims are somehow always doing things shady enough to warrant 80-some FBI agents at a time. Few people will learn or remember that this was a false alarm.

    Consider another possibility: wasn't that recent big kiddie porn case also based in Texas? It's hardly unreasonable to ask if this might be that site reborn. It would certainly explain the agents keeping quiet, especially if they're actively monitoring attempts to connect to that site since they took control.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    1. Re:Child pornography? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • Since the warrant is sealed, we shouldn't be too quick to jump to the conclusion that the raid is somehow directed at the Muslim clients

      Since the warrant is sealed, and there is no transparency or (immediate) accountability, we should (IMHO) assume the worst. Remember, this is the FBI, an agency that boasts about its ability to lie and socially engineer. Also, why does it take 80 agents to shut down a hosting shop? What were they expecting, "You can have my root password when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers"?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:Child pornography? by InfinityWpi · · Score: 2

      Remember, this is the FBI, an agency that boasts about its ability to lie and socially engineer.

      No, that's the CIA, NSA, IRS, LAPD, and YMCA. The FBI is the agency that keeps losing guns and laptops while finding new ways to wiretap your phones without calling it wiretapping.

    3. Re:Child pornography? by coyote-san · · Score: 2

      Personally, I think the child porn laws have gone way too far, but there's a huge difference between the arguments that a technology "might" be used in traffic kiddie porn and the ongoing prosecution of a massive (million dollars/month) ring.

      --
      For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
  32. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by smack.addict · · Score: 2
    You are completely ignorant of Islamic practices. You are simply a hate-monger.


    In fact, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam ALL have their nastier bits. They all have elements that preach hatred, and they all have elements that preach love and tolerence. None of them claim the moral high ground over the others. However, just about any other religion on earth is more tolerent than the three of these religions.

  33. This is the same issue as Steve Jackson Games by Animats · · Score: 2
    Unless the ISP itself, not its customers, is accused of a felony, the FBI is supposed to supoena the data, not search for it themselves.
    I thought we'd settled this with Steve Jackson Games.


    Do we have any info yet on what this is about?

  34. Got Life? by quintessent · · Score: 2

    A few points:
    One can enjoy Slashdot and criticize it at the same time.
    Less is more; briefness is not always thoughtlessness.
    That said, your point is well taken. Positive criticism is usually better than cynicism.

  35. Re:That wasn't me that replied earlier... by Eagle7 · · Score: 2

    Right... an organization called "Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights", that in its declaration mentions only Islamic radicals and Jihads. That's about as decieving as the name Holy Land Foundation.

    Why don't you 1) examine the facts yourself (from a relatively impartial news organization like NPR), 2) go to the library and find some history books, prefereably by Jewish, Arab, and non-biased historians, and read them all to discern the true facts, and 3) if you reference organizations, reference non-biased, egalitarian ones like Amnesty.

    Someone who considers a website like dhimmi.com a good place to start becoming knowledgable in these matters is a far cry from being a "scholar" or Jewish (or any other) history.

    --
    _sig_ is away
  36. Bruce Sterling Online by wiredog · · Score: 2

    Much of his writing, including the Crackdown, is available here

  37. Definition of terrororism by AftanGustur · · Score: 2

    Funny, but Israel IS a terrorist state according to the USA definition:

    The DOD definition of terrorism is:
    "the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

    http://www.terrorism.com/terrorism/bpart1.html

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
    1. Re:Definition of terrororism by AftanGustur · · Score: 2

      I absolutely agree with you.

      That's why I always regard it as half-truth when the press shouts about those crazy palestinian terrorists.

      If killing a political leader in his office, with a rocket fired from a helicopter, is not terrorism, then the whole issue has been turned upside down.

      Also, another thing that is always forgotten. The Israelis are fighting for peace, but the Palestinians are fighting for justice. We will never have neither until both parties understand this.

      --
      echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
    2. Re:Definition of terrororism by mpe · · Score: 2

      Funny, but Israel IS a terrorist state according to the USA definition:

      Wonder if the USA meets the definition, either now or in recent history...

  38. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by smack.addict · · Score: 2
    What you are saying is totally false. Completely false. You may resent me calling you a hate monger, but when you spread lies about a group of people that are designed to make that group of people look evil, that is called being a hate monger.


    Yes, there are part of the Koran that advocate violence against infidels. But that is not really the message of the Koran any more than the message of the Old Testament is to kill homosexuals or the message of the New Testament is to kill Jews. The fact is all Judeo-Christian texts are self-contradictory and advocate violence in places and pacifism in other places. Extremists of all three faiths have historically used these contradictions to justify their violent, evil behavior. That goes for suicide bombers, crusaders, and Jewish terrorists. If you want to start painting religions by the evil done in their name, Christianity is the place to start looking. More evil has been done in the name of Christianity than any other religion.


    My point, however, is not that Christianity is evil. It is that you cannot describe one religion in terms of its extremists and then ignore the actions of extremists in another religion.

  39. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by smack.addict · · Score: 2

    Once again.. my facts are moded as flamebait - yet someone calling me a hatemonger is modded up.


    Maybe it is because you are a hate monger?



    Simply put, Islamic nations don't like us!


    Islamic nations do not like us? You mean like our allies Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey? Or do you mean the Albanians we saved from genocide in Kosovo? Simply put, that statement alone shows you are an ignorant hate-monger. Some Islamic nations like us, some do not, and most have mixed feelings about us. Just like Christian nations.


    We have not actually done much, anyways, to endear ourselves with the Islamic world. We supported a policy that forced Palestinians from their homes to create an artificial Jewish state. Wonder why they would be pissed off at us? I would if I were them.


    You mention bin Laden? He is one lunatic. The world is full of lunatics of all religions, races, and nationalities. You cannot judge a group by its lunatics.



    Even if we hated Israel next week, Islamic countries aren't going to be our friends. Part of this hate was started on behalf of Russians (DURING WWII, NOT AFTER) who saw the radicals as an easy way to hate us. Why do you think they own Migs?


    Who is "they"?


    Oh yeah, I forgot. You think all Muslims are bin Laden clones. That would be a sign of an ignorant hate-monger... the tendency to make sweeping generalizations against a very diverse group of people. Some Muslims have American planes. Some have Russian planes. Some are African-Americans who play basketball in the NBA and are among the most pious people on earth. Some are Arab. Some are southeast Asian. Some are Iranian. Some are Spanish. Etc.



    Our cultures don't mix, they won't. They don't like us - the FBI saw a threat that we didn't see so they went in.


    Well, so far you have not exactly demonstrated a commanding understanding of Islamic culture. It is therefore hard for me to understand how you jump to the conclusion that our cultures cannot mix.

  40. Privacy Protection Act of 1980 by bmasel · · Score: 2

    Searches of News organizations are governed by the Privacy Protection Act of 1980



    --
    Ben Masel: 51,282 votes for US Senate in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary
  41. Re:Once Again, US kow-tows to Israel by smack.addict · · Score: 2

    Really. I am not sure what point you think you have.