Web Site Hacks Rise as War Rages in Iraq

An anonymous reader noted a Reuters news story talking about Website Defacement during the war. Apparently protesters and hackers are defacing hundreds of US and UK sites, both corporate and government.

Comments

And the point is?

[wizardmax]

All this does is make other hackers/crackers/what ever look bad. It will not convert people. It will just piss them off.

Re:And the point is?

[anotherone]

I just heard the 76% number on MSNBC about a half hour before I posted that, and it said "approve of the war", not "agree that iraq is a threat." A search on google revealed several similar numbers: 62%, 70%, 72%, another vote for 72%, 76% (note that it says in no unclear terms that "76% approve of President Bush's decision to attack").

Perhaps you have a credible source that claims the numbers are lower?

Re:And the point is?

[tres]

It's not about the country. It's about being a member of the world community. Iraq is a soverign nation. now that the bush administration has bumbled its way across the ideal of sovereignty, no nation can feel safe.

The real irony is that Saddam's bumbling invasion of Kuwait--doing the same exact thing bush is now doing--was the beginning of all this. Nations came together against Iraq because Iraq had jeapordized the sovereignty of all nations by simply deciding to invade a weaker neighbor.

All those UN resolutions that the bush administration points to as justification for their present action were retribution for Iraq's invasion of another sovereign nation.

Now that's irony.

While bush destroys decades of partnerships with other nations like France and Germany, trading those allies for countries like Ethiopia, while bush scuttles the last remaining vestige of authority that the United Nations had, the bush administration tells us that they are doing what is best for 'merika and all us 'merikans.

Now that's irony.

The "coallition of convenience" is an irony in itself because somehow the bush administration expects us to believe that a bunch of third-world nations hoping for a handout consitutes support of the international community.

The real President Bush had the support of the world to enforce the sovereignty of nations. Our bush has had to buy a band of nations to make a rubber-stamp "coallition."

No one was trying to save Saddam or the government of Iraq. They were asking for diplomacy to be given a chance.

They were asking for the bush administration to utilize the same restraint that we expect all other nations to use.

Bias

[damiam]

Does anyone else find it offensive that the author draws a distinction between "protesters" and "patriotic" hackers? They seem to imply that protesting the war would be unpatriotic.

Re:Bias

[ParticleGirl]

That's a problem I've seen all over media coverage, as well. I love my country, I support the troops, and I hope that they get home soon and alive. I just wish that the government wouldn't spend their lives so cheaply-- I think that we had not yet come to a point where war was the only answer, and as long as it's not the only answer there are alternatives to be explored. I am anti-war, but I am very patriotic and I definitely support the men and women risking their lives for big issues.

Re:Bias

[Telastyn]

Absolutely. Also notice that certain public figures that are "unpatriotic" are being unduely harassed for such views?

The pulling of Martin Sheen's visa commerical come to mind.

The big stink about Rick Nash's comments at the Mavericks game.

The Dixie Chicks getting their music pulled from radio stations.

Locally there's a radio DJ who's ranting on about how protesters deserve shot for hurting America's economy (ignoring the fact that the 'war' will cost (b/m)illions of dollars)

I'd guess that Vietnam protesters probably were also viewed as unpatriotic at the time (as I was not alive for the war, and history likely has biased things)

Other way around?

[mrtroy]

Why is it not the other way around?
rm -rf all Iraq government sites

It just doesnt seem like the smartest thing to do, defacing your own national websites. Hey, our troops are fighting for us across the ocean, lets not support them. You voted, your leader chose to go to war, what is your problem?

Also, hey, our economy is doing poorly, lets deface some corporate sites in a hope they lose millions to lots sales and extra security costs.

Stupid stupid stupid. If you want to protest a war, have a PEACEFUL protest. Protesting a war by doing illegal and hurtful things is the pot calling the kettle black.

These people lose all public respect and support by doing stupid, negative things.

Don't infringe on other people's rights please

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't mind if people protest, but do not deface property and infringe on my rights.

Yesterday, in Boston, protesters sat down and blocked the Mass Ave Bridge, a major 4 way bridge. They also blocked people from getting to work at the Boston Stock Exchange and government buildings. Why prevent people from getting into work that have nothing to do with the war? Let them earn their living. What if an ambulance or emergency crew need to get over the bridge? Why are you drawing our police away from homeland security issues?

I have also seen a lot of graffitti- notably defacing of said Mass Ave Bridge with permanent spray paint. I have also seen private business buildings hit with the "no war" graffitti. I think some protesters are just in it to get on TV and know very little about what they're protesting.

Feel free to protest, but don't infringe on my rights when doing so.

Doublethink...

[Anonymous Coward]

I love the doublethink brought out over the last few years.

Having War will give Peace
Disobeying the UN will give it purpose
Cowardice is the refusal to injure thousands of innocent civilians living in Baghdad opposing a major power's whim.
Bravery is the ability to order the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis without wincing or bringing up your Caesar salad.
Apparently, well-fed young men sitting in millions of dollars' worth of military hardware and dropping bombs from 30,000ft on impoverished people who have already had all their arms taken away are exemplars of 'bravery'.

War on Terrorism... In the words of Terry Jones: "You can wage war against another country, or on a national group within your own country, but you can't wage war on an abstract noun. How do you know when you've won?"

Geez... The doublespeak is astounding.

My favourite one was the attack of "Shock and Awe" that the US is parading, or as the CBC puts it "Anger and Confusion". No one is shocked, no one is awed, everyone is angry and everyone is confused in Iraq.

It's pretty darn hard to be in awe of a nation that is invading you.

Oh wait... we aren't invading iraq, or occupying iraq. Even though they are raising american colours over Iraqi cities that have been.. umm.. liberated...

Yeah.. that makes sense.

Stop playing word games, open your eyes, and you'll see what's happening.

Or you can just live in doublethink and apathy. That's the way a good patriotic citizen should live I guess.

Re:they don't get it

[jlazzaro74]

They have to get louder because they are being drowned out by all the "Go America" bullshit. The media has not given anything near equal voice to anti-war arguments as they have to pro-war rhetoric. The numbers of protestors have been grossely underestimated, and as for the polls that you think tell you 70% are in favor, they are completely fraudulent. I have watched several over the last weeks, and every time the results start to go in the anti-war direction, the questions are changed or the poll is dropped. Besides, any idiot knows you can get any result you want depending on how you phrase the question.

Example: Do you or would you:

• A) Support the war against Iraq
• B) Support the war with UN backing
• C) Oppose the war

Now, since a lot of people are holding out for UN approval so we don't look like a bunch of assholes, you're going to have a lot of votes for B. You'll have some votes for A because about 1/3 of Americans are complete idiot hicks who think Saddam and Bin Laden are the same guy. Now when reporting the results, simply mash A and B together and say 70% support the war. It's not true, but it's not completely false either.

If you think the media is liberal and would naturally want to skew opinions towards anti-war sentiments, I suggest you check out Alterman's book "What Liberal Media"

US isn't spending the lives of soldiers cheaply

[sssmashy]

I just wish that the government wouldn't spend their lives so cheaply

Do you think that the US Gov't is spending the lives of its soldiers cheaply? I can't think of any army in history that places so much value on the lives of individual soldiers as today's US Army. To accomplish a given mission, the Army would rather spend millions of dollars on high tech surveillance and "smart" missiles than risk the life of a single US soldier in actual combat.

The soldiers may be brave and willing, but the Army is so risk-adverse they are willing to do almost anything, at any cost, to avoid American combat casualties.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that at the end of the war, more soldiers die from accidents than actual combat. Probably, the Army's mortality rate won't be much higher than it would be for a similar-sized group driving on American highways, or smoking American cigarettes.

That's because 'Patriot' has become deformed

[thatguywhoiam]

.. in the minds of many Americans.

A Patriot is someone who loves their country, and works to help better it.

A Patriot is not silent on government corruption, illegal wars, or anything else that they think hurts the long-term health of the country.

A Patriot does criticize. They criticize at times of extreme political unrest. They ask questions when questions need to be asked.

And yes, a Patriot will perform acts of civil disobedience, when extreme situations warrent it.

A Patriot does not, under any circumstances, cowtow to the party line and 'fall in' as to not 'cause ripples'. A Patriot stands up and shouts to the fucking ceiling, 'something is wrong', when they feel something is wrong.

(And you know what's really funny? I'm Canadian. You know, one of those countries that's not 'the greatest nation in the whole world'. Whattajoke that phrase is. The hubris knows no bounds.)

Yet Another War Troll

[voiceofthewhirlwind]

I love (note sarcasm) how in the very country these anti-war people seek to save, they would be killed, tortured, or raped for the very actions they do to try to save it.

Do they not see the irony?

The irony is tired and cliched, and a contains two strawmen to boot (the purpose of the war and the purpose of the 'anti-war people'). This sort of arguement dates at least to the war against Vietnam...

The fact that your country gives you a right to protest does not give it the right to invade countries that don't.