Slashdot Mirror
4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d
gobbo writes "The buzz amongst my Muslim acquaintances is that the al-Jazeera site is under "cyber-attack." Shortly after posting photos of mangled Iraqi children the server became unavailable. I don't have satellite TV to see if they are reporting anything on al-Jazeera itself, but pinging their name servers fails too. For those who don't already know, the al-Jazeera channel is a pan-Arabic satellite TV channel out of Qatar." While I am certain many h4x0rs are political, I can't help thinking that script kiddies are like moths to the flame of rising page views. (this was initially posted incorrectly, and has been moved to the proper date)
How is it that any story on Slashdot can survive without any comments at all for nearly 24 hours? Is the system broken? This is unusual!
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
It's probably the kids of the suits who kicked Al jazeera outta the NYSE.
Yeah it is really odd there are so few posts
I think this raises some new interesting questions.
For example, the US military claimed that Iraqi TV, as it was providing information and instruction to Iraqi troops, was a legitimate military command and control target. Would similar online media outlets be similarly classified?
More importantly, would hackers, even script kiddies, be considered combatants if they attack such a military target in a time of war?
I don't think this has any practical implications, just philosophical...
According to this article on MSNBC the US government is considering purchasing advertising time on Al Jazeera in order to get their message to "Arab Street".
I went looking at the mail Al Jazeera web page looking for english information a few weeks ago( I don't speak any other language>, but I didn't see any link to this site. I don't know if its new, or they just don't link there from their Arabic language pages.
I can't find a google cache of it anyway, I hope it comes back up soon.
Democracy isn't about no one telling you what to do. It's about everyone telling you what to do.
First time I've seen a story that doesn't appear on the main
I do have to say that I am saddened to see this happen because although Al Jazeera may have been biased on the side of Iraq, it is good to have alternative news sources to get the other side's story from. And despite what many people may whole-heartedly claim, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NBC, etc all do have a sense of American bias in them. That's besides the fact that half of their reporting is so horrible, it is actually hard to watch sometimes. I've found myself turning off the TV numerous times in response to my disgust for some of the stuff they hack out as "news". Although, I have found the embedded reporter's reports quite interesting, and you can always catch the various briefings, latest field updates, and general news easily enough. But, these agencies spend way to much time on sensationalism, heart-string-picking, etc.
I hope Al Jazeera can get their site back up soon.
The problem I have with script kiddies making political attacks is the same as the problem with high-school students and university freshers filling out the bulk of the current political protest marches.
These people are immature, inexperienced and naive, and are just as easily led to a BAD cause as a good one. (I'm sure many of us old farts cringe when recalling some of the lame ideas we supported when we were young and impressionable.)
THINK, don't just follow the guy with the megaphone.
(I happen to be anti-war, but for anarchistic reasons; I wouldn't be seen dead marching with those socialist loonies who seem to think a protest march is a "gonna bash some pigs and loot me a new pair of shoes" event.)
-- veni vidi nuclei deceri --- I came, I saw, I dumped core.
you can find it here. It's been hacked, but should come up shortly I bet. However, their controversial footage which is probably what you are looking for, is not available there. It's not available anywhere else due to heavy censorship, so you may have to check your favorite P2P network. Searching for 'jazeera' brings up some interesting results.
BTW, we've all heard claims that P2P networks are only used to steal music, movies, etc. This is about the first good example of P2P being used for a valid cause - to share news and avoid censorship. (aren't we supporting freedom of speech after all?)
Jobs? Which jobs?
It's funny to watch how righteous some authorities in the US are getting about Al-Jazeera. I mean, they describe it as a propaganda machine whose credibility is based on being an independant station... sounds like CNN, right? So now we have two CNNs dueling for the plaque-congested hearts and couch-deadened minds of the people! That's a danger that's new to the history of warfare, innit?
Wah!
What was the question?
More pointedly, the DOS'ing of the Al-Jazeera web site coincides with the debut of its English counterpart.
The truth will remain elusive.
Have you been stalked by Seth today?
Writing the headline in "|-|@X0R" speak or whatever is pretty stupid here.
/. - and the hackerspeak is probably the number one reason why no comments are floating up in moderation.
This is a serious issue that should be generating lively debate here on
I rather doubt "script-kiddies" are involved in this, and as I write this the sites are even more down than they were yesterday (DNS lookups fail).
Regardless of what you think of this development, it's pretty obviously both "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters" - and styling it as "n00z 4 n33rD$" is a disservice to this forum.
(Yeah I know my hacker-writing is a bit rusty.)
This Like That - fun with words!
Yeah, this sucks- I was using washingtonpost.com, guardian.co.uk, and english.ajazeera.net to balance my view of the world. I figure 3 lies == 1 truth?! This suxx0rz.
And yes- what is up with slashdot?! But at least this story made it into the older stuff pile- for the past two days I've been constantly loading english.ajazeera.net and checking the google cache for the regular aljazeera.net- nope- its days old.
At least I'm not the only one...
all your jazeera are belong to us.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
More on this here
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
While consulting, I've come across companies doing all sorts of dumb or just lazy things which make their sites slow and not very scalable. Then they get a big burst of unusual activity for whatever reason, their site crashes, and they like to claim conspiracy because it means it's not their fault.
I'll believe this is a DDOS when I see the IRC transcripts from the people claiming to be the perpetrators (if that's not proof, I don't know what is :) Till then, this is Al-Jazeera crying because their site couldn't handle sudden worldwide interest.
More info, and a better written submission, can be found in Doktor Memory's journal.
./ had a k5-type article submission system.
Ah, how I wish that
Yes I know, don't complain, get off your ass and write it. I know, I know...
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
... then the /.ed effect will take care of any standing server...
In Canada, we don't fancy things like socks
Great link... That's INSANE! Their website hasn't just been hacked (I assumed they had just been slashdotted...) but their press had their credentials revoked from the N.Y. Stock Exchange- that's a petty low-blow.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
381!? That's unpossible! You're only allowed a comment every 2 minutes, so 30 an hour, or 120 over 4 hours. You've tripled that!!! Amazing. Of course, it's been -282 seconds since I last posted a comment, so anything is possible with Slashdot's new negative refraction server.
Has anyone considered setting up mirror sites? If we can set up mirrors for DeCSS, I don't see why we shouldn't be able to do the same for the content of this web site.
What would you expect? They were running ISS for crying out loud.
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
I find the apathy on this site towards the possible gagging of a media organization disturbing. On a TV report this week, I learnt a lot about al-Jazzeera. Yes, they are pan-Arabic. Yes, they are critical of the US. They've also been threatened by every single Arab country in the region - closed down, ambassadors recalled, physical attacks. And it was bombed by the US in the first Gulf War when it reported the killing of civilians in a supposedly military target.
You can't have it both ways, even in a war. The Net is being used for some of the most blatant propaganda I've ever seen, but shutting down the Arab side of the argument isn't going avoid bigger problems later.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
until they get posted to the front page of /.
Score another one for the USA!
The vietnam war ended when enough people were sickened by pictures like these, so have a good look.
If you guys would stop posting stories about their website then maybe they'd stay up and running! :)
Undoubtably, I'm sure there's some foul play from the "kiddies", but they sure as hell didn't "accidentally" bomb the Al Jazeera HQ during the Afghan conflict two years ago.
I tell you, folks, if *we* aren't going to look into the cause of this, no one else will. Angel or devil, Al Jazeera offers another viewpoint - and considering the frighteningly narrow perspectives we get in North America, we could use all we get right now.
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
Anyway, considering the very few unbiased news on the war available, DOSing the one that can give another point of view is even dumber than simply DOSing any site.
aljazeerah.
The buzz amongst my Muslim acquaintances is that the al-Jazeera site is under "cyber-attack."
./ing the server as well :)
And I'm sure they'll appreciate you causing the additional of
I stole this Sig
Now that they are being /.ed, they certainly are under cyber attack...
It is disturbing that name lookups on www.aljazeera.net are failing. Anyone have the ip? At least then, if the server is up, it should be possible to take a look.
Inappropriate story. I am boycotting this post!
...sounds to me like a perfect candidate for a secured (i.e. content cannot be altered except by the original author) P2P distribution system.
Ok, here are some mangled grown ups:
http://cryptome.org/us-blackout/us-blackout.htm
Can we stop the war now, please?
Yes p2p can be used for more than just music, movies, and porn...
I've found World Press Review to be a great source of news from other points of view. They are online at http://www.worldpress.org (Sorry, haven't quite grokked the insert-link process) and there's a print version as well. I've always thought this was a brilliant idea for a magazine: basically they reprint stories from news sources around the world. So they create very little of their own content; this is actually integral to their purpose.
In the past few days I've only been able to access the English version of the Aljazeera site for about 5 minutes. While it isn't the best news site out there it is good to mix their propaganda with US propaganda and come to your own conclusions halfway between the two.
I read a story today that Al-Jazeera was pleading with the US goverment to do somthing about the attacks and about two Al-Jazeera reporters bering kicked out of the NYSE. In the past week Al-Gazeera has gained 4 million subscribers in Europe but only 100K in the US.
All I have to say to all this is welcome to free speech. People can't stand in front of the Al-Jazeera ofices since they are in Quatar. Personally I think their broadcasts encite riots and extremists actions. They get the inside scoop with wonderful governments likethe Taliban and Saddam Husayn by acting as their propaganda arm.
I used to have a translation website where I could read their site and when I read what they were posting last week and watched their broadcast, the first thing that came to mind was to write a tiny app to pass around that would start DOSing their site. In the end I didn't since Al-Jazeera seems to be gettign the treatment it deserves. They've even been tossed out of Iran.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Well I reported this story earlier. But sadly they didn't print my version of it. :( I think that taking down the al jazeera site is a classic example of the always stupid and ever popular "shoot the messanger" theory. This article (http://www.msnbc.com/news/643471.asp) on msnbc shows why al jazeera is important, whether you favor the war or not. Today's American journalism is overly ratings driven, hyperbolic and sensational. And don't forget Al Jazeera regularly rankles Arab audiences as well, making its journalists the subject of torture, beatings and death threats. This link (http://tarjim.ajeeb.com/ajeeb/default.asp?lang=1) is a great translation site for Arabic to English and unlike babelfish it works well. Besides h2Xors would do well to remember that most Iraqis don't use the internet, they are watching it on dish network. The only people they are keeping from the site are Americans.
Damn kick them while they are down. First a DoS from script kiddies, then the slashdot effect.
They have also been banned from Wall Street, only ,oops we changed our minds lets take Basra first. Iraqis are lining up for free bubble gum. 1000000 iraqis troops have surrenderd, Saddam is figting alone after being killed atleast 7 times. Makes me sick
good news networks like foxnews and cnn are allowed. Evetrything is well, the war is on track, we'll take Baghdad on Tuesday, Basra is not important
US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
It also reports that Al D reporters have now been banned from reporting from the New York Stock exchange because of 'other priorities' (words of NYSE VP).
The article further features a Reuters (US owned) press photo of a dead Iraki soldier. Its world-wide dissemination, including to US media, was never protested, while pictures of dead US soldiers were reason enough for very public protests against Al D...
-Omar
Thankfully, The USA will soon finish FREEING IRAQ and KILLING SADAM AND HIS ARMIES!!! The other 90% of the world can pound sand if they don't like it.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.aljazeera.net/
:)
Now go get em
"Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it" Richard Feynman
Surely they are DoS-ed. They just appeared on Slashdot.
Vilmos
Would it be a good idea for Al-jazeera to publish their content on freenet? Their articles would then be immune to any kind of censorship like they claim they are victim of.
Looks like the 1337 |1d13z have launched the most severe "cyber-attack" yet...a slashdotting.
-Psy
Australia's ABC (TV, I suppose) has reportedly
cropped the portion of a picture of a young
girl's feet, which were to be seen dangling,
after apparently having been blown loose by
an explosion, in the ongoing Irag war.
The report of this "editting" the gore away,
to make a photo more acceptible to Australian
viewing audiences, as well as other revealing
aspects of media censorship, were mentioned on
this morning's Media Report, now available via
audio-on-demand, in RealAudio format, at:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/mediarpt/audi
This 27 March program included British photo-
journalist Tim Page talking about this kind
of selective reporting & sanitizing of war
images, eg, from Vietnam to Iraq.
Come back in about a week for the transcript,
eg at URL:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/mediarpt/st
War solves nothing... unless, of course,
your company is selling to Defense...
Now if people did the same to Fox News the world would be a better place.
"Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
How is this any different than protesters clogging the streets to stop "business as usual"? I guess only that one gets you sent to jail and subject to civil action.
Four weeks later...
"No, really, this time we actually are being DDOSed!"
Said the IT guy at Aljazeera. 3 weeks ago he admitted to wanting a little free publicity when one of his co workers mentioned that they were surprised no one was trying any serious computer hacking on either side of the war. "Sometimes the copy cats just need a little kick."
</tongueincheek>
I'm sincerely sorry to see this happen. I hadn't realized they had an english arm, I've been going to the arabic site just to see the pictures I can't find anywhere else. I can't wait to see the articles! (No playboy jokes, ok?)
-Adam
Not for her it's not.
Or her
Still believe in smart bombs, precision bombing etc.
Does he?
This slashdotting will hurt them more :)
I'll never understand why people aren't willing to see what they're doing to the people of the country they're attacking. To whoever took down the aljazeera site: yes, we are killing Iraqi children. Taking down the server that holds the pictures won't bring them back.
The reminds me of the US representatives to the UN covering the print of Guernica (is it the original?) at the UN headquarters so that an image of the terror of war wouldn't be the backdrop for press conferences.
Isn't this a natural next step? Even though Al-Jazeera is not Iraqi, it certainly publishes information our allies don't want out there.
(Especially pictures of dead children have a tendency to get people to think war sucks.)
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
The US is in the process of FREEING IRAQ from a sick sick leader (SADDAM) and his armies. I look forward to the day that the rest of this confused world will look back and realize that is the case.
As far as "AlJazeer".. I hope one of the US missles takes out the entire building (if it is in Iraq). If it's not in Iraq, then I am proud to see ANYONE hacking it and bringing it down. Hell, even the Slashdot effect works nicely. Too bad the Iraqi people will have to continue to suffer while they are liberated by America. If Saddam cared enough about the Iraqi people to not hide his weapons in schools, this would not be the case. Still, far less will be killed during the liberation process than Saddam would have tortured/raped/killed had the US not taken any action.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ars Technica had this yesterday (scroll down a bit). Al Jazeera is basically toast (last time I tried to access it) but it's hard to say on this end whether that is [a] DoS attack(s) or just everyone suddenly going, "I should check that out ..."
And you certainly don't see the Daily Mirror site being hacked, do you?
(bottom of page...)
But it's probably all just paranoia anyways. Hard enough to load BBC news sites these days :[
... a lot of alternative media sites are also down today. Not to start a conspiracy theory, but it seems fishy.
I'd be willing to bet a small amount that most commercial servers in foreign countries aren't built to handle the type of traffic that, for instance, MSNBC's or Fox's servers can. Link to some more of those in Slashdot articles and keep them hammered... Eh, an idea. Perhaps a silly one.
Here's a clue for you: Al-Jazeera is /not/ on the best server out there. Going there last week the server was already slow- no doubt under heavy load. Posting controversial things drives traffic up. So the server is down. THIS IS NOT NEWS.
Hey look, the last thing slashdot linked to is also down. Good job at not understanding the concept of the internet. Kill yourself.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
And naturally the best way to help out the Al-Jazeera website while it is being attacked is to /. it.
something is really going wacko. when i refresh sometimes the aljazeera thingy is first and other times it's the declassified story. and their dates are the same as well.
I hope that the USG is removing ALL the pro-terrorist idiots and the news sites that support them! If you are not with us... you are against us. If you are against us, you won't be for long.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
script kids are unlawfull combattants!
Therefore the Geneva convention don't apply to them.
Look out USA, it's raping time!
Now, if this were happening to CNN, there's little doubt that the US would spare nothing to find out those pesky "terrorists" that did it.
They would then classify them as "non-combatants" and ship them off to Cuba.
Domain Name: ALJAZEERA.NET
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: ALJNS1SA.NAV-LINK.NET
Name Server: NS3.ALJAZEERA.NET
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 26-mar-2003
Creation Date: 30-aug-1996
Expiration Date: 29-aug-2010
Take a look at that.. particularly the "Updated Date".
This was no script kiddie.
> I hope that the USG is removing ALL the pro-terrorist idiots and the news sites that support them!
We agree here, now tell your administration to get rid of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, then we need to disarm U.S.A from using mass destruction weapons and finally liberate U.S.A the same dumb way like they are doing with IRAQ now.
I found out when I complained to the station manager about how the time display on their screen had a tendency to drift wildly, often being several minutes fast or slow.
His answer was that the display came from an NT box buried down in the corner of the control room, and that the clock would only synchronize to network time when the box was rebooted, approximately once a month :)
What changes is at around 18/19 you start to see the gray areas inbetween. You realise there are very few issues that are anywhere near as clean cut as you thought they were. Unfortunatly, until the grey areas appear it's pretty much pointless trying to explain it.
Unfortunately it's possible to derail the development of certain grey areas by outside forces *cough*religion*cough* which means some people will always have unrealistic views on some topics.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
test
I hear the news channels pronounce it in sooo many ways:
kwa'-tar
kwa-tar'
gutter (this pronounciation just sounds egregiously wrong to me)
cutter
ka'-tar
ka-tar'
What's right?
Yeah, I know, it isn't an American company - but our principles should be universal.
Our media has done a sorry job so far of covering this war. Since it will be along time until we have a war on American soil, how else are we Americans going to learn the devastation that it brings. (And don't tell me 9-11 was war on our soil. That was a horrible catastrophe, but nothing like a war.)
I really hope this wasn't our Government's doing.
The US took out al jazeera's sattalites.... So you won't see it even if you have the channel.
Under ordinary circumstances I really hate script kiddies, and censorship in general. But, in this case it could be an exception.
When you look at the ramifications, its pretty much a wake up call. If you want to play with 21st century technology you better get youre head out of the 13th.
chrisd
Co-Editor, Open Sources
Open Source Program Manager, Google, Inc.
DNS is likely still available, as is the web server . . . but, no one is getting to it without a route.
/. effect or a bunch of hackers . . . this is politics. Smile everyone, Big-Brother is looking out for you. Wouldn't want you to see anything that would upset you would they. :-P
Seems as if a few folks in Europe and Asia are still announcing that network. . . but the rest of the world is filtering that network out as it hits their networks.
It never appears in any of the naps in the US and only a couple in Europe and Asia.
This isn't a
Typical.. Thanks for making my case about the fine quality of the individuals that support Saddam. You are an excellent example and make my point for me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
there's a great al-jazeera feed out there on the net, dont think the owners would appreciate the link though, so you'll just have to hunt around for it
being slashdoted doesn't help either. :-P
SIGFAULT
on a US based messageboard, is like sucking dick in a sauna. You're getting it up the ass wether you swallow or not.
Could I make myself any clearer?
And please keep your homophobic modding to yourself. For the love of god and all that is holy (Georgie, The Pope and Tony the Tory, in that order) consider all the kids who are browsing at +2 exclusively.
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
I listen to the BBC, Radio Netherlands, Cuba on shortwave in addition to the usual internet sources. I was able to get Al-Jazeera in Arabic but was hopeful when I heard that they had an english page. Too bad that short sighted people have decided to take it into their own hands to silence an important alternate view to the war. I hope Al-Jazeera can get up and running in the future.
I'd like to try the IP address directly.
The other day when loading up slashdot (like I've done everyday for years) /. for place to purchace PeacePinsso I
I noticed an add on
went out of curiosity and saw "We help fund anti-war organizations
like EndTheWar.org" EndTheWar.org This site is truely disturbing,Using the
Al Jazeera photos of young kids with their heads blown off for propaganda.
After doing some more digging on just who these people are I found links
all over the place for WPK (workers party korea) led by General Secretary
Kim Jong il and International A.N.S.W.E.R. headed by Brian Becker who just
with a simple google searchshows up ties to WPK. Other more disturbing things that
I do not want to say because this was a few days ago and I cannot provide
links until I get access back the machine I was using at the time.Feel free to
look it up yourselvs you may find something I didn't.
I hope slashdot will pay closer attention to who's adds they are promoting
-- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
Well, if the hackers don't finish off the al-Jazeera website the /. effect surely will...
The antidote to this kind of childishness is lots of mirror sites. Anyone know where any mirror sites are, or where to go if they want mirror volunteers?
Netcraft listed the web service as coming from a "private residence" in Hoboken NJ.
I want Al-Jazeera to be up but something tells me that it may be due to poor planning on their part more than "hackers", because the English version went down really fast. First they denied it was hackers and just said it was alot of page requests, now they want the Government to do something about it.
Either way I hope they get up soon. They are missing a hell of an oportunity.
What? Let's see.. the USA is a stable peace loving country that embraces freedom. Saddams Iraq (the old Iraq) is the exact opposite.. madman for a leader, single dictatorship whose own people hate but cannot say they hate (nor can they vote to change it). Additionally, other Countries own dangerous weapons, but none have leaders that remotely compare to Saddam for psychotic.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
ya ya ya
Of course, that itself could be a spin for them.
-sj
From what I understand, the Al-Jazeera channel is available unencumbered off of some satellite, so given $200 worth of hardware (I'm sure many satellite junkies have the necessary hardware) their news content is readily available.
I'm not sure I'd buy into the organized DDOS, but rather into a (near) world-wide slashdotting type effect. I've been frequenting their website quite a bit over the last week, and it's been fading in and out of existence (at least for my locale) quite often.
Most of the 'scandalous' images have been slurped from various sources and they're available in plenty of places. One such site is http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/gulfwar2/ (be gentle!), which includes the pictures of the supposedly executed soldiers.
I hope Al-Jazeera beefs up their infrastructure and expands their newly launched minimal english service... it's nice to have news from outside sources (ie: outside the US sphere of influence) with an opposite view-point.
I lived there three years and watched the transformation of opinion.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Yeah, stopping Hitler did nothing.
Seems the DNS entry isnt resolving, doesnt necessarily mean the site itself is down.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
all your al-jazeera are belong to U.S.!
http://www.digifuzz.net
Heheh. Your first sentence is disgusting.
- Getting rid of natives,
- Slavery,
- North & South,
- Vietnam,
- Japan,
- Iraq 1,
- Iraq 2
That's what I recall from right now. One of the youngest countries but one of the countries with the most wars in historybooks.
You know what a historybook is ? Grab your example from the bookshelf and remove the plastic cover from it and then read it. If you don't have one then ask your administration to give you 5 Dollars to buy one maybe they have that money left for you becuase they need 74.7 billion to make a sensless war.
Would somebody post some facts? I know somebody out there knows the IPs, so we can see if it's only the DNS down.
When I first heard about Alj.. being down yesterday, it was just badly lagged. Their video feed was suffering from too many users, so there's no reason to think the web server is any more capable.
The latest Slashdot meme.
I really hope you are trolling, but I fear you are not.
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
A warning to my fellow slashdot geeks, dorks and pals (and yes the includes me too, being gfless now)
:(
Just got an email which is obviously some form of trojan claiming to be from MS - information attached.
I can only assume the exe file is either a standard virus or a funky trojan either way be careful guys.
From: "MS Network Security Department" "
To: "Microsoft User"
Subject: Latest Network Security Pack
Date: Wednesday, 26 March 2003 19:16:53 -0700
Microsoft User
this is the latest version of security update, the
"March 2003, Cumulative Patch" update which eliminates
all known security vulnerabilities affecting Internet Explorer,
Outlook and Outlook Express as well as five newly
discovered vulnerabilities. Install now to protect your computer
from these vulnerabilities, the most serious of which could allow
an attacker to run executable on your system. This update includes
the functionality of all previously released patches.
System requirements Win 9x/Me/2000/NT/XP
This update applies to Microsoft Internet Explorer, version 4.01 and later
Microsoft Outlook, version 8.00 and later
Microsoft Outlook Express, version 4.01 and later
Recommendation Customers should install the patch at the earliest opportunity.
How to install Run attached file. Click Yes on displayed dialog box.
How to use You don't need to do anything after installing this item.
Microsoft Product Support Services and Knowledge Base articles
can be found on the Microsoft Technical Support web site.
For security-related information about Microsoft products, please
visit the Microsoft Security Advisor web site, or Contact us.
Please do not reply to this message. It was sent from an unmonitored
e-mail address and we are unable to respond to any replies.
Thank you for using Microsoft products.
With friendly greetings,
MS Network Security Department
2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. The names of the actual companies
and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners
Fewer junk characters is hard sometimes
Sorry forgot to include the file name file name,...
"PATCH443-71.exe" and a couple of hundred K/B
Here's the original photo
I think U.S. (and apparently also Australian) news sources do their audiences a discredit by not showing the unedited reality of war.
Link: ... You can add the Iraq Satellite Channel to your 500-channel universe with a little tinkering. Iraqi television is rebroadcast onto the Net by the Dutch service DSL-TV, in both Real and Windows Media formats. The catch is that unlike ish.com's Al Jazeera stream from Germany, DSL-TV tries to limit its service to computers inside the Netherlands as part of its terms of service...
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
dflmkq34 34q sdjflsdjf 3q4joi jiu9t i8kl jnwqjoi uiqnf anfkl asdklf jqio 9423q t3q gikaekl gm3io jkt8945 89tkelfgm lksdmgko j234gdfsgr ksegkerw gkrwj g403 tjas klgjdsakl j3489 jtsjkl nkjehg uierwgu89 rt kre tjkerht 934 iotj dfshaf438t sdtj u84 tweqr89tjer sdguiof equi9tj 8934 ojtio reiuot 3q4tg 89q3jtg hwrej ktge sex
War solves nothing... unless, of course,
your company is selling to Defense...
War sucks, but read a history book.
It's solved pretty much everything from nazi occupation of europe to toppling the Roman empire.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
War solves nothing... unless, of course, your company is selling to Defense...
Or owns somebody calling shots in the administration. Take a look at the administration's press transcripts from yesterday. Haliburton apparently got a slam-dunk on a contract of undisclosed value, and Ari won't even talk about it.
How Politicians Lie: http://www.factcheck.org/
No, especially since it's the US government that is doing the hacking.
How can a site is attacked by DOS when Micro$oft killed it?
Shut -- your -- fucking -- mouth.
While other people have posted links to various sites that are hosting images and the Al-jazeera news feeds and images, I decided to mirror the news feeds as an attempt to help move these feeds to people who are curious about the hype circling this situation, but unable to see it in the news.
I've rarely been moved like this situation moved me. After reading about these Al-jazeera clips showing dead American soldiers and captured American POWs, I wanted to actually see them to see if the hype matched the furvor. They aren't completely gruesome, but they definately show that this war won't be a week jaunt through the Middle East.
I don't mind having the news censored for security reasons, but when the rest of the world can view these clips, and Americans can't, my whole opinion of the situation changes.
Posted anonymously. Mod accordingly.
It's amazing how many Americans seem to be such wilful proponents of doublethink.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I'm having trouble getting to Cryptome tonight as well. Can anyone else see it?
Their rating on Alexa which rates all websites traffic. Al Jazeera's rating is 444 and that is considered very good. Slashdot's Alexa rating is 1103 so that should give you a good idea of how much traffic they got on a regular basis.
e er a.net/
Here is the link to Al Jazeera's Alexa rating:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details?url=www.aljaz
If it wasn't under attack before, it sure as hell will be now :P
I.O.U One Sig.
Supposedly they're pretty good - an interesting note in the article also about how our own media censors the news.
I use Windows... like a two dollar wh.. why don't I just go ahead and not finish that sentence.
While it lasts... there is a mirror of some of the aljazeera stuff at:
2 003/03/23.html
http://radio.weblogs.com/0108234/categories/iraq/
Possibly someone with some spare bandwidth can "mirror the mirror"
War sucks, but read a history book.
It started pretty much everything from the nazi occupation of europe to the creation of the Roman empire.
More liked slashdotted http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8543 People kept trying to access it, it couldn't take the amount of hits.
From what I've read, someone got in through an old BIND exploit and simply screwed up the DNS..
If I could get to my mail, I'd find the article.. heh
Hillary Rosen, Iraqs new Press Minister announced today that thousands of American soldiers had been taken prisoner.
General Franks later clarrified that what she meant to say is the equivalent of thousands of iraqi soldiers had been captured.
I can't actually watch Fox News but I've been reading the closed captions in #Livenews on irc.striked.org since day 2 of the war
As far as I can tell they aren't even pretending to be balanced. I find it kind of odd (yet reassuring) that the state run media in Australia and England seem to be far more balanced than the American "independant" news sources.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
When we hear the 3 Iraqi almost weep in tears about the torture, we know that we must send the Iraqis to Allah. God damn Saddam Hussein.
I submitted this story TWO FUCKING DAYS AGO! Way to be on time!
i know ill get modded down for this quicker than anyone ever before, which is sad.
but al jazeera actually shows whats happening to the palestinians by the israelis. and with people tuning in looking for iraq info, you dont want them stumbling in and seeing whats really happening. i think you can guess who may be doing this.
The psychologist not the first officer. The effects of a parenting methodology that discourages discipline and encourages infantile outburts will continue to have some seriously negative consequences.
Being a GTA I can tell you the level of immaturity tolerated by the parents of this crowd rises to shock and awe. Brats with a resentful sense of entitlement that cry to their parents on their cell phones when they don't get what they want.
It was fine until you posted it to /.
You try to be cool, and in the know - and you call that juvenile scriptkiddie stuff "hacker writing"?
Do not touch a computer again. Ever. Please. You suck.
If you had named it aptly, your comment would have been a great one. As it is now, you purely demonstrate that you know absolutely *nothing* about computers beside opening MS Word. Blech.
al-Jazeera should show pictures
of dead Kurdish children. Those
killed by Saddam Hussein in his
gas attacks upon his on countries
citizens.
I kinda think this is a mixed bag.. I back the war totally and I think its horrible that they posted dead soldiers pictures and for that I kind of like the attack, but on the other hand, even though I back the war, I always try to see it through multiple sources and view points...Im very anti-left but I read indymedia regurly becuase Im not a idiot about it and want to see other points of view.
Support Objectivism and the United States,
Ayn Rand
- Getting rid of natives,
at the time indians, chinese, africans, and anyone not white and from a western country was considered subhuman, this was the case in much of the western world, not limited to the usa.
- Slavery,
see above and i'll add that there was lobbying to abolish slavery in the constitution(or bill of rights, forget which at the moment), it wasnt done at that time in an attempt to get a union together, the founders figuring some progress is better than an all or nothing attempt.
- North & South,
im not sure how this was a bad war, it was a fundamental difference in opinion and economic systems. yes it involved a large loss of life, but there was no 'innocent party' as you seem to be thinking.
- Vietnam,
this was an attempt to stem the influence of the USSR, and was exacerbated by johnson's insistence on fighting the war, and not leaving it to the generals. we wont get into how the french screwed it up to begin with.
- Japan,
japan attacked the us at pearl harbor, as the first US act of agression. in doing so they hoped to disable the US fleet long enough that japan could finish their empire expansion into the phillipines, solidify their hold on much of SE asia, and china. they did so after the us imposed sanctions on them (limiting their oil supply) after japan invaded russia for resources in 1926 or so. again, japan was hardly innocent(rape of nanking, use of korean woman as forced prostitutes, etc). if you meant the atomic bombs in hiroshima and nagasaki, look at papers from the time, the fear was an invasion of the home islands would cost a million lives, losing 200k or whatever the # was(i dont have a history book at hand) was a better option.
- Iraq 1,
the US was driving iraq out of kuwait, along with a large coalition of other countries, i fail to see where the us was wrong here.
- Iraq 2,
fittingly called, as its a resumption of hostilities after the iraqi regime failed to carry out the terms of it's cease fire of the first persian gulf war.
you left out ww 1, ww2, the spanish american war, korea, and bosnia among some smaller wars, so we wont go into those.
compared to many european countries, the US avoids wars, even if you limit it to the last 100years.
i'd advise you to grab said history book, blow the dust off and readup on world history, you'll notice the french dutch and english doing much worse things than the US could ever dream of doing.
Their site has been really really slow the last few days anyway. Half of the pages wont load up within a minute. Either they're running it on a 386, a 2400 bps modem, or maybe everybody's hitting it a little too hard. (AS IF slashdot's going to help that any...)
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
From where I am (Norlight, Central WI) that connection stops dead at the NAP in Chicago.
Someone is either shut some pipes off to stop the problem, it's REALLY big, or the IP is a typo.
My bets are on a typo. Did you modify a hosts file and use that? or just the IP in a browser...
There was a small blip in the news services near the beginning of the war about American companies and government web sites being the subject of DDOS attacks, presumably from peace activists or anarchists.
The stories didn't stay around long. I suspect when it comes to allocating TV time, cyber attacks don't hold a candle to bombs exmploding and live pictures of troops in a firefight.
you know.. the guy who keeps trying to start the slow clap at all the wrong times. :(
i just realized that as i was re-reading what i posted.
*sigh*
http://www.digifuzz.net
You know, its incredibly ironic to me that any pro-America posts in this thread have been modded down. I see a bunch of complaints regarding freedom of press, speech, and so on, yet anything pro-USA is modded as flamebait or troll.
Honestly, it seems as if there are some real hypocrites around here. I have seen some very good and valid posts that favor this war modded down. It works both ways, you know?
This post will be modded down in... 3... 2... 1...
[FromTheMorning]
Lets see
Slavery you say we should not have had freed the slaves, (north and south go with this one so that kills one of your wars)
vietnam, we helped our "friends" the french, that was their war
Japan lets see they attacted us first, and that was WWII, hum so we should have let the Nazi take over the world??
Iraq 1, we were asked by the UN for that one.
Yes we started Iraq 2 but that is a justifyable one.
The only one I will give you is the getting "rid of the natives" but then again we were not a nation at that time, that was the brits.
This is news for nerds after all! A little bit of research on my part has revealed the following:
- DNS servers for aljazeera.net are
ALJNS1SA.NAV-LINK.net. 172800 IN A 217.26.193.15
...
- netcraft's report shows up two ip addresses and two netblock owners for www.aljazeera.net (either constant changing or more likely load-balancing). The netblock owners are French Navlink for 217.26.193.10 and Horizons Media and Information Services Private Residence Hoboken NJ 07030 US for 64.106.198.10, though this IP was registered to ARIN until the 21st March. Both are running IIS/5 and it looks like they've been doing things daily from the 20th-25th March. Both IP addresses are un pingable. The 217 address also drops at one of my ISPs boxes on a traceroute, while the 64 address gets dropped at a verio ip in london.
- The whois record for aljazeera is a little strange (Jazeera Space Channel, hotmail address and po box?).
I don't understand routing well enough to know what could cause something like this? Are these machines that are reporting unreachable hosts under tracert actually acting in response to a DOS, or are they themselves denying the service? Could someone have issued an order that made this happen, or is it a network corruption issue?NS3.aljazeera.net. 172800 IN A 213.30.180.218 Neither DNS server can be accessed or pinged. A traceroute to 217.26.193.15 bombed out very close to home as unreachable (5th hop, still in my ISP). A traceroute for 213.30.180.218 got to Paris, then to an unknown location on the same network and then it made three jumps to IPs and got stuck! It ended at (s/star*/*/, damn lameness filter) 12 2547 ms 2543 ms 2359 ms so-1-0-0.mp1.Paris1.Level3.net [212.187.128.41]
13 3124 ms 2295 ms 1919 ms unknown.Level3.net [212.73.240.71]
14 2078 ms 2735 ms 3383 ms 212.73.242.66
15 2377 ms 2263 ms 2262 ms 213.30.129.210
16 2359 ms 2479 ms 2327 ms 213.30.128.126
17 star* star* star* Request timed out.
100 star* star* star* Request timed out.
Symantec have a incredible list of recent threats (I was stunned how long it was). 6 were discovered since the 24th of March including 3 backdoors. Is it reasonable to think that this could simply be a virus/worm/backdoor based DOS?
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
You are really stupid, I wasn't SAYING it, I was writing it therefore my mouth was shut during that time. Regardless of this it doesn't change the fact of the initial text.
oGALAXYo
Is it more responsible to show gore, or not to show it. I'm not sure, but it does seem that the media didn't want to enflame passions over 9/11 any more than they already were.
ascii phonetics, anyone?
Yup. SAMPA is ASCII phonetics.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Screw realty just hook me up another monitor!
Who actually belives in your writing ? I bet that 99% of all these wars USA had their hands in. Either in creating the situation for a war or making the war on their own. No one is beliving USA anymore anyways. If your administration says it's dark outside then I need to go outside and make sure it's really dark.
Damn. Thanks for the link. A horrifying photo that the media here in America refuses to air (or even acknowledge).
To all those against the war:
//are// fighting the terrorists. A whole damn country-ful of them.
These Fedayeen Sadaam ***are*** the same as Al-Quaeda. There are 40,000 of these fuckers. Suicidal, homicidal, amoral, powerful, connected. We
To those who are from Arab countries or support them:
You must admit your people come across as awfully savage and unloveable. Fix the problem.
To those who will claim that the US actions are morally equivalent to the terrorists: Yeah, so what. Life's a bitch, get over it.
Our POWs are dead meat, fuck 'em, move on. There's only one winner, last man standing.
> Yes we started Iraq 2 but that is a justifyable one.
Justifyable such like this ? Pay attention on the first 2 pictures.
Ladies and Gentlemen, please.
CNN is an American company. I'm an American. I don't want to see negative stories about my country. If they show me negative stories, I might change the channel. CNN knows this. CNN's advertiser's know this.
Does CNN broadcast biased stories? Probably Not.
Is CNN biased in its choice of stories? Definitely Yes.
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
An Interview. CNN's Aaron Brown talking to Hafez Al-Miraz, the chief Washington correspondent for Al Jazeera.
...is the footage of people who are dead and bodies were put to Al-Jazeera for the last two days of Iraqis. Today it was put on for American victims. It is very -- it's a tragedy. It is very painful and emotional issue.
...on both sides.
...respectfully, I understand that. And I, believe me, would be the first to argue and have many times in my professional life, that we are not in the business of sanitizing war or anything else. But is not -- is there not a line between sanitizing the news and simply putting something on TV because it is gruesome. You can show the horror or war without zooming in on the most gruesome -- I mean, I don't -- I'm reluctant to even describe...
...what that 6.5 minutes looked like, because honestly, sir, it is vile.
HAFEZ AL-MIRAZ, AL-JAZEERA CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: Good evening.
BROWN: Look, I'll play this as directly as I can. Explain to me the rationale that your network had for displaying what can only be described as the most gruesome of pictures across the Arab world?
AL-MIRAZ: Thank you for the opportunity. I would like just to explain, first of all, that Al-Jazeera, as you know, an independent news media. We're not taking sides in that conflict or in any other conflict. We are reporting the news. And we are putting out footage that we feel it is newsworthy sometimes for our own audience. This is an Arabic language news network. We don't broadcast in English or at least not yet.
The Al-Jazeera for the last three days have been putting out footages of bodies of Iraqi dead Iraqis. They were both armies or civilians. And today, the -- we found that there are footages, or we have a chance to put out footages, although it was shot by the Iraqi TV or part of it by Iraqi TV, of the other side of the war. Also the -- that the human suffering on the American level, on the American side.
Some of the footages for your case or my case may be -- would be controversial. Do you need to put that much of the footage or the close-up? And it is a debate, even in our news room for a while. People who feel that it is the reality of war. And you cannot have just war as video games and just the very sensitized image of the war. But the main point...
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: Mr. Al-Miraz.
AL-MIRAZ:
BROWN: All right, sir...
AL-MIRAZ:
BROWN:
AL-MIRAZ: Yes.
BROWN:
AL-MIRAZ: And that's what happened. Al-Jazeera, when we got the chance to edit these tapes, first it was rushed and put out as is or mostly as is. And I agree with you. Some of it is really terrible and horrible. Unfortunately, some European networks, including Sky News, that is also the owners of Sky News are the owners of other U.S. networks, put the pictures as is. And maybe they did not edit out, but Al-Jazeera did edit out after that the pictures. And we made sure that it doesn't show a description of faces or anything like that. That happened on -- later on.
Also, we honor the request by the Pentagon to give them some time, not to play the footage -- not to play the video for the POWs until they identify them and notify the families. That happens around 12:00 noon today. And the -- my headquarters did really respond to that request for humanitarian consideration. And we honor this as of 12:00 noon, until like 8:00 p.m. today, Al-Jazeera did not put any of these footages or the POWs, while other networks in Europe, including U.S. allies like Spain state TV, Portugal, Belgium, others. They did put it out.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: And sir, and they have to -- sir, they have...
AL-MIRAZ: If I can finish, Aaron, on that.
BROWN: I'm sorry, but they have to answer for themselves.
AL-MIRAZ: That's true.
BROWN: In this case, sir, you have to answer for Al-Jazeer
"Best experienced with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.5"
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Yes justifyable, it is sad but there will be Civilian casualties. I am not happy that any one has to die, I am sadden by that, but some times evil things do happen even when one is working to try to do good. This world is not a fare place, never was never will be.
This could be a flamebait for the patriotic ones but for the sake of free information, you can still see the pics that were posted on Al-JZ on this website:
War pictures that you are not meant to see in a free country
Bet it is very tempting to go after this site, after all it is not like the US government is going to prosecute you for it.
Gee, people I meant On topic! (not off topic)
Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Interested in AI? MACR
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX, etc, would never show the mangled legs of anyone hanging off the side of a bed, even if they were those of bin Laden's. The networks never display anything remotely gruesome.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
ok, here we go.. the auto was invented in Germany? maybe one design. the auto was DEVELOPED in the USA (Ford Motors) first mass production. If we want to continue to nit-pick, we can say PERSONAL computers were developed in the USA (at least mass produced). Encryption has been around for thousands of years.. as has mathematics. This Country the one that brought us the telegraph, lightbulb and thousands of other innovations (Java, the GUI desktop..etc) is indeed the greatest Country on the planet. While I agree that others have contributed and even invented some of the things we take for granted today, my point (in case you are to thick headed to catch it) was that America is not an "uneducated" country as the genius that was commenting on my IQ was implying. Additionally, the $ we are spending to FREE IRAQ is money well spent (afterall, we STILL have 80% of the worlds wealth).
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
These kids are obviously unaware that the showing of the dead people, mangled or otherwise is quite normal on Arabic TV.
They have been trying to communicate the horror of what the West refers to as 'the palestinian problem' for many years now. One effective way of getting across how bad it actualy is, is to to show the actual bodies of actual dead people.
And so they have for many years now.
The West should be very wary. Western channels refer to the Iraqi War as "The Freeing Of Iraq" aka "Operation Iraqi Freedom". The Arabic channels (without execption) refer to this as "The War Against Iraq", "The Invasion Of Iraq" and "The Occupation of Iraq" etc.. all negative connotations.
I don't believe the Arabic world will react well to seeing "The Other Occupation" complete with footage identical to what we normaly see from the Gaza strip.
I think we are about to see the duel bewteen two different cultures ideas of real 'free' and 'open' media. And I don't think the west will be all to hapy with the result.
sigs are natural, sigs are good, not everybody has one, but everybody should...
If somebody knows the IP and can post it here, maybe we can still get to it. Nameservers are helpful, but if the site is still up we can still get to it....
~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
Is that any different then being Slashdoted?
The US bombed the al-Jazeera station in Kabul... :)
DDOSin' their site isn't much worse than that...
"Tradition is just the Illusion of permanence" - Woddy Allen
ABC cuts gore from injured child's Iraq war photo
:-)
What the hell was Gore doing in Iraq anyway? Is he going to run for President again or something?
Their primary DNS provider, Datapipe, seems to have had a DNS server failure. A very specific one. AlJazeera's primary name server at "ALJNS1HB.DATAPIPE.COM" appears to be down. Datapipe, however, is up.
The backup name server, "ALJNS1SA.NAV-LINK.NET", operated by a completely different service provider, NavLink, is also unreachable. NavLink has operations in Lebanon and Dubai, so it's outside of US control. But traffic to that server is apparently being blocked at switches in the US, with QWest and PBI both returning ICMP "destination unreachable" messages, but from different points. Try a traceroute. If you have access to core router info, see if you can find out what's going on with that routing.
On a related note, Verio cut off service to the site of the Iraqi Mission to the United Nations several days ago.
There's a story here - all this isn't happening by accident. It's not a denial of service attack on the site itself, either. This is being done by people who can change routing data.
Listen to your uneducated wirtings dude. We have 2003, high technology, high education (except 90% of USA) and we still need to solve things with war ? Sorry but I'm not sold with that kind of argumentation. You have easy times writing about civilian casualities while you are sitting at home and obviously aren't affected by this. Why don't sign for the army then and go there ?
Look at Gorge W. Bush. Failed two times with his own oil company, then became governeur and now stepped into his fathers pants continuing nuking IRAQ. The first things his troops did where securing the OIL plants instead moving towards BAGDAD and nuking Saddam. I bet his only reasons are oil and nothing more. Even now the afterwar stuff got sold already to one of the biggest US. companies involved into oil and other big industry things. Your administration is selling rights of IRAQ to US insustry without even waiting for end of war.
If you want to tell the NYSE what you think about their efforts to tromp on freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of information, etc., go here.
"I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
according to a friend who works at the state deparment, the general consensus is that a certain gov't organization may have been resopnsible for hacking the al-jazeera web site.
The good reason is OIL. And I don't forget the people in IRAQ who suffer from USA/UN sanctions for 13 years now. USA is responsible for these people to suffer these days, not Saddam.
Now they need to DoS attack the propaganda slingers CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News and we'll have made some progress.
Long live CSPAN, news.google.com, and slashdot.
If you want the pics, click here
Warning, some are pretty gruesome. The IP is 213.30.180.219 in case you want to surf the site. It's all in arabic and I can't find the link for the english translation.
I thought this string was about Al Jazeera being the target of a DoS since airing pictures of collateral damage? If you have a problem with the US removing a murder/rapist/dictator the hard way so he cant gas, grind, rape, shoot, steal etc then post your ignorance where it belongs. (Please see your own post you tool...doh!)
Has any groups claimed responsibility for the DoS on Al Jazeera? I dont watch this channel and dont really care what they show/say seeing as they seem to be a medium for a lot of garbage, but I am concerned about the freedom of the internet being jeopordized again by script kiddies or others. If you dont like what you see because you can't handle reality, garbage, propaganda, offensive material, etc...DON'T WATCH/LISTEN. How different are these people from dictators and extremists when they force their beliefs upon people by denying the right and access to information and other views?
When freedom is lost, all lose out.
-1 Overrated (Too many big words for me to comprehend)
Quote
Robert Fisk, The Independent
BAGHDAD, 27 March 2003 -- It was an outrage, an obscenity. The severed hand on the metal door, the swamp of blood and mud across the road, the human brains inside a garage, the incinerated, skeletal remains of an Iraqi mother and her three small children in their still smoldering car. Two missiles from a single American jet killed them all -- more than 20 Iraqi civilians, torn to pieces before they could be 'liberated' by the nation which destroyed their lives.
Who dares, I ask myself, to call this 'collateral damage'? Abu Taleb Street was packed with pedestrians and motorists when the American pilot approached through the dense sandstorm that covered northern Baghdad in a cloak of red and yellow dust and rain yesterday morning. It's a dirt poor neighborhood -- of mostly Shiite Muslims, the same people whom Messers Bush and Blair still fondly hope will rise up against Saddam -- a place of oil-sodden car repair shops, overcrowded apartments and cheap cafes.
Everyone I spoke to heard the plane. One man, so shocked by the headless corpses he had just seen, could only say two words. "Roar, flash,'' he kept saying and then closed his eyes so tight that the muscles rippled between them.
How should one record so terrible an event? Perhaps a medical report would be more appropriate. But the final death toll is expected to be near to 30 and Iraqis are now witnessing these awful things each day; so there is no reason why the truth -- all the truth -- of what they see should not be told.
For another question occurred to me as I walked through this place of massacre yesterday. If this is what we are seeing in Baghdad, what is happening in Basra and Nassiriyah and Karbala? How many civilians are dying there too, anonymously, indeed unrecorded, because there are no reporters to be witness to their suffering?
Abu Hassan and Malek Hammoud were preparing lunch for customers at the Nasser Restaurant on the north side of Abu Taleb Street. The missile that killed them landed next to the westbound carriageway, its blast tearing away the front of the cafe and cutting the two men -- the first 48, the second only 18 -- to pieces. One of their fellow workers led me through the rubble. "This is all that is left of them now,'' he said, holding out before me an oven pan dripping with blood.
At least 15 cars burst into flames burning many of their occupants to death. Several men tore desperately at the doors of another flame-shrouded car in the center of the street which had been slipped upside down by the same missile. They were forced to watch helplessly as the woman and her three children inside were cremated alive in front of them. The second missile hit neatly on the east-bound carriageway, sending shards of metal into three men standing outside a concrete apartment block with the words "This is God's possession'' written in marble on the outside wall.
The building's manager, Hishem Danoon, ran to the doorway as soon as he heard the massive explosion. "I found Ta'ar in pieces over there,'' he told me. His head was blown off. "That's his hand.'' A group of young men and women took me into the street and there, a scene from any horror film, was Ta'ar's hand, cut off at the wrist, his four fingers and thumb grasping a piece of iron roofing. His young colleague Sermed died the same instant. His brains lay piled a few feet away, a pale red and gray mess behind a burned car. Both men worked for Danoon. So did a doorman who was also killed.
As each survivor talked, the dead regained their identities. There was the electrical ship owner killed behind his counter by the same missile that cut down Ta'ar and Sermed and the doorman, and the young girl standing on the central reservation, trying to cross the road, and the truck driver who was only feet from the point of impact and the beggar who regularly called to see Danoon for bread and who was just leaving when the missiles came soaring down through the sandstorm to destroy him.
In
Try reading British, Australian or Canadian media on the net for a few days. Or watch the BBC 24/7 news tv on the net.
I do, and Foxnews and CNN look like 24/7 Pentagon infomercials in comparision to serious media.
There have been numerous reports and I can confirm it from my own experiments that IP traffic to english.aljazeera.net is filtered out at a router in NYC. Immediately neighbouring IP addresses (+/-1 in the last octet) belonging to the provider that hosts Al Jazeera are passed through this router. I have also reports that for quite a while after Al Jazeera's IP was blocked in the US, the server was still accessible from Europe via routes not leading through US controlled territorry.
I don't know who's lamer...
you for writing that, or me for being able to read it just fine.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
First the us is not in it for the oil, they secured the oil fields so they would not be burnd, the people of Iraq will need some way of brining in money after they are rebuilt so that they can statane themselfs. We are not there to take over and occupy them, after they are rebuilt they will be free to chose their own leader, and they will need a way of competting in the world economy. Second the French wanted the oil that is why they did not want the war, they were getting cheap oil from Iraq. And I don't think I want them to nuke any one, that would be disastrous. Infact I don't even want them to kill Hussain (sp?) I would rather see him come out of this alive and brought to justice.
1.2 billion demonstrating muslims don't think that USA is right. The muslims had civilisation long before USA was born. During these days while muslims celebrated their high culture your ancestors where jumping from tree to tree eating banannas.
Psychotic madman in charge of a weak country contained by UN mandated military restrictions and sanctions, dimwit in charge of the world's most powerful nation.
which is the more dangerous?
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
From germany, using german telecom (largest ISP) access to the english edition works fine at the moment. when connecting via msn, packets get stuck within the msn network...
thank good we live in free europe
That this story ended up in the archives area *before* being posted here, and then when people noticed, it shows up here.
What's cookin' Taco? Are you, like the rest of the American media trying to censor the real story of the war??
What makes you think they're not just being slashdotted? ;-)
(Or they cut off as soon as the traffic took them over their bandwidth limit
Anybody who can look at these pictures and still say war is okay had better have a long hard look at themselves.
> they secured the oil fields so they would not be burnd, the
> people of Iraq will need some way of brining in money after
> they are rebuilt.
Oh seriously..
USA will control their OIL, take the money from saddam so the iraqi people can build up their economy again. and whom do they spent the money for rebuilding economy ? to the USA of course. You rape these people multiple times.
a) you made war on them,
b) you take and control their oil,
c) you set up a new government who are the minions of the USA and sells them IRAQ oil ceaply,
d) you give them the money from saddam hussain, they spent the money to the USA to rebuild their economy,
e) IRAQI citicens pay your war costs because of a) - d).
Sorry regardless what you say, the IRAQI people are the real loosers of that war and regardless what you say the USA is taking their OIL and their MONEY. In the one or other way both is landing in the USA sooner or later.
Tell me you have watched al-Jazeera. If not you should really take a look before slamming me. It is one thing to report the news. Quite another to make news and incite riots. Al-Jazeera is running an "America The Great Satan" commercial every half hour broadcast.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
It's back up, but all the text has been replaced with squiggly lines.
Do you have ESP?
News for infidels, stuff that matters.
Seems to be down at the moment, though.
From reading the comments, I've realized that few Slashdot commenters know much about the history that leads to the present war in Iraq. So, here is a very short recounting. The details given here have been reported by many reputable news sources. There seems to be no disagreement about these facts.
All the actions by the U.S. government mentioned here were largely hidden from U.S. citizens. United States citizens paid the bill, but were mostly unaware of what their government was doing. Even though the U.S. government is presently at war with Iraq, only a small percentage of Americans can find Iraq on a map. It is said that a high percentage support the U.S. government's war in Iraq, but this is a blind kind of support that does not mean that there is comprehension.
Thread 1, Iran: Hidden elements of the U.S. government overthrew a democratically elected president of Iran (Mossadegh) because he wanted to reduce the profits of U.S. and British oil companies doing business in Iran. The U.S. government supported a very weak man, the Shah of Iran, who became very brutal toward his own citizens. Eventually, people in Iraq overthrew the Shah. The U.S. government's actions de-stabilized the country and encouraged the violence to come.
People in Iran began supporting terrorism against the United States, in retaliaton for hidden U.S. government interference with the Iranian government.
To counteract Iranian support of violence against the U.S., the U.S. goverment began supporting and encouraging Iraq in a war against Iran. This was very profitable for U.S. weapons manufacturers. Weapons manufacturers in the U.S. were delivering weapons to Iraq under long-term contracts up until the same month as the U.S. began war on Iraq the first time.
April Glaspie, US Ambassador to Iraq, encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait. She said,
"I admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait." [my emphasis]
She also said, "I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during the late 60's. The instruction we had during this period was that we should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen to emphasize this instruction. [my emphasis]
Here is a complete transcript of the meeting between the U.S. ambassador and Saddam Hussein. (http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspi e.html)
Ambassador Glaspie acted on instructions from Secretary of State James Baker, as she said. Later, she denied knowing that she was encouraging war. (Mr. Baker is a friend of George Bush and was later White House Chief of Staff.)
It is not known why the U.S. government would support Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. However, in the meeting mentioned above, April Glaspie said, "We have many Americans who would like to see the price [of oil] go above $25 because they come from oil-producing states."
The fortune of George H. W. Bush was heavily dependent on oil profits, and Texas is an oil-producing state. If the U.S. government is successful at gaining control of Iraq, profits for some companies in the U.S. will increase enormously because Iraqi oil will be sold directly to U.S. companies, rather than to Turkish companies, as it is now.
Thread #2, Afghanistan: There is a huge amount of oil in one of the countries inland from Afghanistan. However, the only good way to get the oil to people who would buy it is to build a pipeline through Afghanistan. The Soviets wanted to get
Gross. Here are more photos:
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Explanation of editorial decision
So, I guess it's not like a big video game after all.
Yes some of the oil will end up in the us. but that is besides the point. We are not in it for the oil. We are in it because Hussain is an evil person. Or have you not heard of his human shredder
How about the chemical weapons he "did not have" that they are order to use.
How about the missels he "did not have" that were used the first day of the war?
so back to the point is this a justifyable? yes!!
There are many who have called the USA the new Roman Empire, including many evangelicals in our own country (who are likely currently supporting this war, of course). Ready to be toppled?
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
This is insightful?
The flame war over the war continues! I say, To Arms!, fellow slashdotters, and flame on!
To rebut the parent's lunacy:
Nobody with any sense is suggesting that the US, or anybody else for that matter, should just do nothing. However, there are many other options in any conflict situation besides doing nothing and killing people. The US should try to address the problems which underlie the instability of the region, as well as those which underlie what is often called the "campaign of hatred" against the US by the Muslim world. The US should attempt to address these issues in a reasonable and civilized manner, instead of reverting to the basest barbarism, xenophobia, and might-makes-right mentality.
Oh wait...I guess the US should walk away and lift the sanctions. Then Saddam can do whatever he wants.
I fail to see how the sanctions were preventing Saddam from committing atrocities. Their purpose was clearly to soften up Iraq for this invasion, which has been in the works since before Sept. 11 (see the Project for a New American Century for an explanation of the real causes behind this war) and had nothing to do with preventing atrocities. In a very real sense the first Gulf War never ended, the US has been killing Iraqis ever since and shows no signs of wanting to stop. Violence and killing will never stop atrocities, only create new ones.
The US should indeed walk away and lift the sanctions, and then find other ways of dealing with the problem. There are some pretty smart people in the US, I'm sure they can come up with something more creative than this silly and pointless rerun of the same old shit they've been doing for the last century. Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at MIT and staunch pacifist, for instance, has some pretty good ideas which at least bear consideration.
You can't change the past
No, but we can influence the future, and it is clear (as has been seen over and over again in history) that undertaking immoral actions such as war will more than likely have a strongly negative effect on the future. This is known as karma. If you do something wrong now, odds are, nothing good will come of it, regardless of the supposed benevolence of your intentions.
War is morally wrong and can never be justified. The US is just getting itself into a huge mess which will cause all sorts of horrible atrocities and further bloodshed, as we will all see soon enough.
If you are interested in my views on this, please see the thread linked to in my sig, which is a great debate on the issue of Pacifism vs. Jingoism in which I said most of what I have to say on the matter.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
Yea after feeding someone through a plactic shredder alive is so much better...
I think you really need to take that look your self.
I know, I know, bitching about rejected articles is off-topic. Obviously, the two stories about the latest Mandrake point release that got published yesterday were a little more important than a network security angle on World War III.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
I think the first poster's point was that Al Jazeera should use the existing footage and photos of Saddam's infamous chem attack against Kurds to give some balance in their reporting. Being an Arabic network, you can't blame them for taking an Arabic slant. No harm, no foul there. But the feeling in the US is that while Al Jazeera may not be presenting itself as pro-Saddam, they're not exactly breaking their necks to show that he is indeed a murdering thug. A mass murdering thug at that.
Now, I don't speak Arabic, and don't have access to Al Jazeera television. But despite our misgivings during this time of war, Al Jazeera has largely been a positive influence in the Arab world. It HAS to be, because it's the only Arab based network that's willing to post opposing views....as long as those views are from WITHIN the Arab community. Still, that's an important step. Everything else in the Middle East, outside of Israel, is usually state-run media beholden to whatever national goverment funds it. How honest can Iraqi, Syrian, or Libyan state media be? At least Al Jazeera gives Arabs an independant view, if not totally unbiased.
Al Jazeera is the only Arab-language network where people across the Arab world can watch an unfettered debate on religion or politics. Does anyone think that Saudi or Iranian state television would allow a debate where one of the participants openly stated that some of the Prophet Mohammed's practices (like polygamy) are "rubbish" for today's times? Good Lord, Khomeini ordered a Fatwah (execution) against Salman Rushdie for less.
We may not always like what they say, and indeed, they may at times be anti-US, but they're a far cry better than the other alternatives. Al Jazeera may very well be looked back upon in the future as one of the factors that eventually brought true democracy and freedom of speech to the Arab world.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
I have taken a hell of a long look at myself over my life and no where can I find the justification for killing children. Maybe you can but I cannot.
Well, the site certainly seems to be accessible from India. Of course, I haven't checked the English version. Just the Arabic one.
The pictures of the mangled children are available on the first page itself. Bear in mind that mangled just doesn't capture the essence of the pictures. I could not bear to see anything below the fourth pic or so.
http://www.theagonist.org/
thoughtful, global, timely
I've been glued to this site since the war started. A great "war blog" with plenty of good comments, and excellent information.
My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
I will add to this if you please. The portion I am adding reads like a conspiracy theory. Its not. It has been documented in many places, including PBS and the White House itself.
I wont go into details here, I will allow one to read the material themselves. You can also watch the video as PBS online is currently hosting a story frontline did about the mess.
In brief:
The Project for the New American Century is a DC based think tank that has imagined a world under complete US military and economic domination (or "freedom" as it were). They have fiddled with and written documents concerning a post cold war world where the USA has become the Worlds Only Superpower and what that means from a Strategic viewpoint.
In the early days, Paul Wolfowitz produced a document that detailed the expansion of the American empire that seemed too radical at the time and was cleaned up and rewritten and stowed away. Over time, and through the most recent Coup by this incredibly radical group of men, this updated document, with the help of the PNAC, became the National Security Strategy Of the United States. Most chilling about this turn of eventls and policy is the new found policy of "pre-emption". Which I think we are seeing now in the creation of the 51st state.
Also chilling (to me anyway) is the fact that this is the "official story", the one being reported by the obviously biased media.
Anyway.. some more links..
CBC.ca's take.
More Canadian Insight
The Frontline Special
I believe that aptly describes our foreign policy.
You tell 'em, Nept! Nice, succinct, and to the point.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
It looks like it's just a "special edition" site devoted to war news only, and I'm not certain that it's officially run by Al Jazeera. I don't speak Italian, and effectively neither does Babelfish. :-)
If nothing else, though, they have lots of images which help to fill in the gaps left by other news media.
Note that it isn't spelled the same as in English - "i" instead of "ee".
http://www.aljazira.it/
You tell 'em, elmagil!
It is clear that the embedded journalists are there to ensure that we get the best quality, most up-to-date propaganda ever seen in the history of the world.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
They weren't hacked, and DoS didn't shut them down. They simply didn't plan for the amount of traffic they'd get and weren't prepared, and were shutdown by their providers. Too many eggs, not enough baskets... when one hosting service canceled them, the rest went down like dominoes with the increasing load.
And might I add that as someone that was in the theater before and after the invasion of Kuwait...
You people are full of shit...
Got Code?
You tell 'em, ewe2! I find it disturbing too. "The first casualty of war is the truth."
My site: Free Nature Pictures
"ok, here we go.. the auto was invented in Germany? maybe one design. the auto was DEVELOPED in the USA (Ford Motors) first mass production."
The internal combustion engine and the diesel engine were both invented in Europe. They are fairly vital to the motorcar. Yes Henry Ford did invent mass production of the car and bring it to the masses but from that point onwards it wasn't just the USA which invovated in motor vehicle design.
"This Country the one that brought us the telegraph, lightbulb..."
The light bulb was invented by Joseph Swan in the UK but Edison being owner of the electric company ended up being known as the inventor of the lightbulb. Even worse, Edison didn't use the carbon filament at first (he used bamboo), that was suggested by one of his employees and he claimed it as his own.
"afterall, we STILL have 80% of the worlds wealth"
Using what criteria? US GDP is $10 trillion, Japan's GDP is $4 trillion, Germany's GDP is $2 trillion, UK GDP is $2 trillion, CIA Factbook. External debt US $862 billion, Japan N/A, UK N/A, Germany N/A.
The US has some very bright people. But it also has some very dumb people and it's education of non US matters needs improvement. A significant proportion of the US's schoolchildren don't know where Canada is. It seems that the knowledge of the rest of the world isn't much better.
The US is alright but most non US citizens will tell you that it's not as great as you all believe it is and that's partly the problem with the US's image. Your nation does come across as arogant treating the rest of the world as country bumkins.
One design? You seem to have a clue deficiency. Btw, i failed to mention that at the same time a certain Mr. Daimler also invented the 'car'. (also a german).
/when/ did Mr. Ford develop the model T? By the time he came along with that there were /lots/ of other car designs. He did invent the assembly line apparently. But thats not a car.
/mankind/ invented these things, and ultimately it matters not which inventions were invented where, we all ultimately benefit. (hopefully).
/Arabs/ - in particular the arabs in what is now generally Iraq - maintained and advanced the state of the art in mathematics and other fields.
the auto was DEVELOPED in the USA (Ford Motors) first mass production.
Ok, and
we can say PERSONAL computers were developed in the USA
Indeed, You see, i'm not denying the USA has invented many things, i actually explicitly acknowledged it did. However, i am trying to help you with your USA-invented-Everything delusion. Again, would it have been possible for the USA to have developed personal computers if it were not for all that had gone before?
Encryption has been around for thousands of years.. as has mathematics.
At this stage I would recommend you consult a few history books. Particularly, pay attention to the "dark ages", where most of europe "lost" nearly all the advanced knowledge built up by earlier civilisations (ie by the greeks). During that time, the
Also, i suggest you look up the difference between cryptanalysis and encryption.
America is not an "uneducated" country
Indeed it isnt, though you're one of the dimmer lightbulbs it seems. Course, Arabs are not "uneducated" either.
Additionally, the $ we are spending to FREE IRAQ is money well spent (afterall, we STILL have 80% of the worlds wealth).
You have a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth, but i doubt you have 80% - not economically feasible considering Europe isnt terribly poor either. Care to back up that figure? Even if so, all that wealth and you still cant buy a clue...
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
what percentage of the attacks were from agents of the Federal Government? We can't have any opposing view points in the media now can we? We must trust everything Western media tells us.
President Bush knows what's best for us. !
I forget what show I was listening to, but on NPR yesterday, there was an interview with somebody in charge of an english language newspaper in the middle east. He had a really good perspective on this. Basically what it boils down to is that both CNN and Al Jazeera are commercial operations and it is in their best interest to present news that caters to the views of their audiences. So you see and endless stream of armchair quarterback generals on CNN and you see bloodied civilians on Al Jazeera.
One thing that they didn't go on to say in the story was the effect that this should have over the long term. If news outlets, being commercial organizations, are going to present news that enforces people's preconceived notions, it leads to a natural polarity of belief. People who are liberal will tend to get liberal news from liberal sources and find themselves even further removed from conservatives or the truth that exists somewhere in the middle. Vice versa for the conservatives.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
The inability to access aljazeera.net began, perhaps not coincidentally, after they launched their new English language website on Monday. If they ever come back again, the english language version should be available at:
http://english.aljazeera.net
Have you heard of the oil for food program? Where do you think it all went?
Are you aware Saddam and company decided to abuse the hell out of it? Instead of food and medicine, in came cosmetic surgery supplies. Yes, breast implant equipment.
I had a sucky sig.
Go read the World Wide Web Consortium's 10-minute introduction to HTML
Or just go to your browser's View menu, and look for Source. A link looks like this as source code:
<a href=http://www.worldpress.org> World Press Review </a>
and looks like this in the browser window:
World Press Review
See? The part between the 'opening tag' (the thing that starts with 'a') and the 'closing tag' (the thing that starts with '/a') is what you see on the screen. The browser typically underlines it for you and/or changes the color, and if you click on it it takes you to the address to the right of the href=, which is inside the tag, and therefore is not text to be displayed, but an instruction to your browser.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
Has any one actually heard of Al Jazeera complaining of conspiracy?
The original poster mentioned rumors among muslim friends, presumably regular Al Jazeera readers sho were unprepared to have the rest of the world turned on to their news source.
I, by chance, did a search for Al Jazeera last night and I found their site and a bunch of news stories about the controversial photos.
It is probably safe to assume that they got a huge amount of exposure last night. Their link was probably in everyone of those articles and everyone probably wanted a look.
Conspiracies are like UFO's and ESP, there is always a more believable explanation.
Perpared to be modded down as flaimbait/troll 3...2...1
I know from several of my colleagues that Al-Jazeera prides itself on being the 'CNN of the Arab' world. Now, I don't speak or read arabic yet, so I've had to read it through translation sites until recently when the english site cam up (english.aljazeera.net). Anyhoo, it is pretty slanted pro-arab, anti-american. However, it DID contain some very interesting articles and insights. Many of their stories are less than objective, but many of their insights are INVALUABLE, because there is no way in hell, "Western" media would report on them. Now I'm not fostering the idea that CNN, Fox, or even the BBC is some sort of perfect objective school of journalism. God knows they can be pretty slanted themselves. I think if Al-Jazeera works at trying to be more objective, they could really become a valuable member of the news community.
My biggest fault with them in the english site seemed to mix opinion pieces with fact reporting. Like all news sites, the editors can have an opinion pieces, but they should seperate it out from the reporting. I'm sure with the anti-western bias, combined with their less than stellar "objective" reports, they've got an uphill climb. We'd be far more forgiving if they were "pro-american," but then they would also give up a lot of access to the arab world that they enjoy. I hope they clean things up. They did correctly report the non-uprising in Basra, and a couple other items the western news got wrong. However, the comments embedded in the story ruined the factual reporting.
Cthulhu for president!
Let me link you again idiot:
PNAC
NSS
Now instead of being a moron, how about backing up yer verbosity with some facts? or are you a typical conservative who comes to us sans factoid?
This is a bit dated, but seems very commical in a way. I wonder if the gov. needs more people to work for them? I want a job =) http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:GNwkUPjA4BYJ: www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/69748.htm+hack+iraq& hl=en&ie=UTF-8
-----
I have a gig of ram and I know how to use it !!
-----
-=You might be a geek if your computer is worth more than your car=-
Go figure...
traceroute to www.aljazeera.net (213.30.180.219), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
.....
7 bb1-cha-P0-0.atdn.net (66.185.138.64) 17.123 ms 19.147 ms 16.940 ms
8 bb1-atm-P6-0.atdn.net (66.185.152.182) 31.900 ms 31.133 ms 29.685 ms
9 pop2-atm-P0-3.atdn.net (66.185.138.41) 28.426 ms 20.133 ms 21.120 ms
10 level3.atdn.net (66.185.138.34) 24.502 ms 26.773 ms 24.377 ms
11 so-5-2-0.mp2.Atlanta1.Level3.net (209.247.9.169) 21.280 ms 21.517 ms 22.023 ms
12 so-2-2-0.bbr2.Washington1.level3.net (64.159.0.134) 34.771 ms 36.158 ms 36.033 ms
13 so-0-0-0.mp2.London2.Level3.net (212.187.128.133) 108.243 ms 106.422 ms 107.959 ms
14 so-1-0-0.mp1.Paris1.Level3.net (212.187.128.41) 113.356 ms 114.413 ms 117.004 ms
15 gige4-0.hsipaccess1.Paris1.Level3.net (212.73.240.3) 114.168 ms 112.680 ms 118.229 ms
16 212.73.242.66 (212.73.242.66) 113.650 ms 116.909 ms 113.534 ms
17 213.30.129.210 (213.30.129.210) 146.609 ms 129.430 ms 133.604 ms
18 213.30.128.126 (213.30.128.126) 139.440 ms 139.569 ms 143.619 ms
19 * * *
Bush and Rumsfeld Had Better Watch Their Back
... against insults and public curiosity". This may number among the less heinous of the possible infringements of the laws of war, but the conventions, ratified by Iraq in 1956, are non-negotiable. If you break them, you should expect to be prosecuted for war crimes.
George Monbiot, The Guardian
LONDON, 27 March 2003 -- Suddenly, the government of the United States has discovered the virtues of international law. It may be waging an illegal war against a sovereign state; it may be seeking to destroy every treaty which impedes its attempts to run the world, but when five of its captured soldiers were paraded in front of the Iraqi television cameras on Sunday, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defense secretary, immediately complained that "it is against the Geneva Convention to show photographs of prisoners of war in a manner that is humiliating for them".
He is, of course, quite right. Article 13 of the third convention, concerning the treatment of prisoners, insists that they "must at all times be protected
This being so, Rumsfeld had better watch his back. For this enthusiastic convert to the cause of legal warfare is, as head of the Defense Department, responsible for a series of crimes sufficient, were he ever to be tried, to put him away for the rest of his natural life.
His prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba, where 641 men (nine of whom are British citizens) are held, breaches no fewer than 15 articles of the third convention. The US government broke the first of these (Article 13) as soon as the prisoners arrived, by displaying them, just as the Iraqis have done, on television. In this case, however, they were not encouraged to address the cameras. They were kneeling on the ground, hands tied behind their backs, wearing blacked-out goggles and earphones. In breach of Article 18, they had been stripped of their own clothes and deprived of their possessions. They were then interned in a penitentiary (against Article 22), where they were denied proper mess facilities (26), canteens (28), religious premises (34), opportunities for physical exercise (38), access to the text of the convention (41), freedom to write to their families (70 and 71) and parcels of food and books (72).
They were not "released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities" (118), because, the US authorities say, their interrogation might, one day, reveal interesting information about Al-Qaeda. Article 17 rules that captives are obliged to give only their name, rank, number and date of birth. No "coercion may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever". In the hope of breaking them, however, the authorities have confined them to solitary cells and subjected them to what is now known as "torture lite": Sleep deprivation and constant exposure to bright light. Unsurprisingly, several of the prisoners have sought to kill themselves, by smashing their heads against the walls or trying to slash their wrists with plastic cutlery.
The US government claims that these men are not subject to the Geneva conventions, as they are not "prisoners of war", but "unlawful combatants". The same claim could be made, with rather more justice, by the Iraqis holding the US soldiers who illegally invaded their country. But this redefinition is itself a breach of Article 4 of the third convention, under which people detained as suspected members of a militia (the Taleban) or a volunteer corps (Al-Qaeda) must be regarded as prisoners of war.
Even if there is doubt about how such people should be classified, Article 5 insists that they "shall enjoy the protection of the present convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal".
But when, earlier this month, lawyers representing 16 of them demanded a court hearing, the US court of appeals ruled that as Guantanamo Bay is not sovereign US territory, the men have no constitutional rights. Many of
before anyone says it's the CIA, Al Jazeera is often critisied by Arabs for being too prob US, as it's patron is US funded and renowned for letting US troops have bases in his country. it's unlikely this would be CIA or the like. I think script kiddies sounds about right.
For all the people here complaining about Iraqi TV violating the Geneva Convention and criticizing Al Jazeerah for airing that footage, please remember your government has similar skeletons in its closet (if not worse). As the linked article states, the spread of that documentary has pretty much been blocked in the US by your media. The Bush administration even tried to get the German government not to air it in Germany. This administration just takes the term hypocrisy to a new level. Is it any wonder why Bush felt the need to not participate in any International Crimes Court? If they don't have anything to be afraid of then why object to this?
I read the article on Qatar in this month's issue of National Geographic just today. I was surprised by what a disruptive force al-Jazeera is in the Arab world; it reaches 35 million people in the Middle East and airs a lot of controversial material. As another poster pointed out, it can be a very unpopular channel in the Arab world because it unapologetically airs all sides of the issues (even things like women against polygamy). al-Jazeera is an island of free press in an oppressed region of the world.
The leader of Qatar funded it with $140 million of his own money. Qatar is one of the U.S.-friendly countries where we have two bases.
Intentional killing agreed.
So your agreeing that deliberately killing children is wrong. Then you should be on the side of the Coalition. They are not the ones that are parking weapons in hospitals and next to national monuments. But the difference you are trying so hard to ignore is that IF the children were killed by a coalition weapon gone astray it was not intentional. As hard as we have tried we have not been able to make them perfect. Not only that be we are not the ones gassing children. Again you are distorting facts to fit your own opinions. If you really cared about the children why haven't you been howling for Saddams removal since he gassed entire villages of women and children?
Or balance, or truth, or objectivity...
Even by English standards, the BBC newsroom is a pack of loony-left Trotskyites at the fringes of respectable opinion. They are as anti-American as anyone in Europe.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
There's a huge difference between slashdotting, and DOSsing, disconnecting, or hacking (0wning) a site.
In the case of slashdotting, there are a huge number of interested people who are going to actually *see* the site.
That means that the information gets out, and opinions are affected.
DOSsing a site, on the other hand, keeps people from seeing the original material at all. In the case of the US Government DOSsing a site, as it would seem to be here, opinions are not affected in the original way, but US citizens do learn that the US Government fears their having information.
Very important lesson, there. Remember it.
[Espcially you government censors who may be reading this: remember it. Germans knew they were losing the war when the sites of German victories kept getting closer to Berlin. But the censors themselves were remembered with infamy.]
Now, hacking/owning a site is the most evil of the three, in my opinion, because that makes it appear that the original site was saying something that they did not want to say. That, too, eventually gets out. When it does, watch out.
Disclaimer: Right now, I consider Saddam to be evil, because of what I have seen on major media. I *could* be wrong. But I also consider our own government to be at least partly evil, based on what I have seen first-hand. I am much less likely to be wrong there. Anyhow, my wildest dreams involve the US putting aside its wars, returning home, and living peacably with whatever wealth or poverty peaceful living brings. Until then, I will live in exile. But golly gee, the US is a beautiful country, and it would be nice to return.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
DNS through my ISP, AOL/Time Warner, reports that there is no such thing as aljazeera.net. I had to go to an outside DNS server to find it. I hate it when ISP's start censoring the news.
I hate to be the one that tells you this.. But none of your two links provides any logic or proof.
I must therefore assume that you are either brain dead or illogical.
Stupid is is Stupid does.
Again, where is your proof other than a right wing anti American Web site link. GWB clearly states his response to 9/11. Do you live in a terrorist Nation? Then fear us. If you don't, then why are you jealous?
America was burned on 9/11 (or 11/09), not your country. We have every right to defend/protect ourselfs from the likes of you. We didn't start this war, you did.
I'd call you stupid, but then again I digress.
War doesn't solve anything; it just changes the problems, sometimes into ones that could be solved. WWII stopped the Nazis, but it started the cold war, which led to Korea and Vietnam, neither of which are entirely sorted out yet, and Saddam, bin Laden, and other US and USSR-installed dictatorships, which brings us to the present conflict.
The only thing that solves problems is people settling their differences and deciding it's not worth fighting. That's not to say that war is useless; some regimes cannot be stopped peacefully (particularly ones bent on defeating the whole world) and the problems war creates may not be as bad or as pressing as the ones they replace. But it's generally the period of reconstruction after the war that solves problems, not the war itself.
If al jazeera is available from Germany and other locations, perhaps someone from a more accessible region could set up a proxy server for us folks in the states to use...
I'm not really one for conspiracy theories, but this doesn't look like a hacker M.O.
.... all of the reports that come from the field are from reporters who have been placed within military divisions. Half of these reporters act like they are soldiers in battle!! This certainly has effects on their reportage.
Half of this war is an information war, winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, keeping public opinion in the States on-side and also proving to the rest of the world, many of whom are against this war, that this military action is justified.
I have been amazed by the role of the Western media in all of this (NBC, CNN, ABC and also the BBC)
Al Jazeera is the only other independent media voice in the region that has access to both sides of the war.... they are also the only media outlet that seems to have shown any interest in reporting the impact on civilians in Iraq. Whatever their bias is I would still like to be able to view their coverage and judge for myself.
There is so much spin coming from both sides that it is frustrating if you just want to know the facts. The organisation with the greatest advantage in keeping the al-jazeera website out of American households is the pentagon (see "hearts and minds" as mentioned above).
And who supplied him with the Gas in the first place, who supplied him with the weapons of mass destruction, he sure as hell didn't build them himself at the beginning.
Until the US can admit that they fucked up big time by supplying him with the weapons and tools to make more and apologise to the Iraqi people for supporting Saddam in the eighties I have no time for the bullshit spread by either side.
The US could have fixed this problem twelve years ago when they had a valid reason to go into Iraq, however they pulled back leaving the kurds and Shi'ites to swing in the wind, this time round they have no such valid reason (and no the mid-term elections aren't a valid reason), this is more about trying to be seen as taking action on "terrorism" when they can't get at the one man who masterminded 11/9.
Bah I give up, go ahead, blow the shit out of Iraq and see if the troops come home in months or years. The shi'ites have promised to resist foriegn occupation, Turkey is itching to have a go at the kurds and Iran is eyeing of the shi'ite regions. Congratulations people you have just got yourselves well and firmly sucked into the Middle East, I hope you like humus because your going to be eating a lot of it from now on.
LOL! Like the last election had anything to do with voting booths! That's a good one, oh jeeze, it's nice to see some humor in this debate! Ha ha ha ha!
Where I come from, there is a strong tradition of pacifism (the Quakers).
You should listen to those Quakers more carefully, they're some of the most sober-headed and enlightened people around.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
Been trying The Iraqi News Agency (INA) wesite, http://www.uruklink.net/iraqnews/, it has become inaccessible over the past 2/3 days. Anyone know what happened with that?? Of the 65 foreign journalists (sanctioned by the US government)covering the war from within Iraq, 57 are American/working for American media outlets
Any chance the author of this attack could be drawing a paycheck from the US government?
It would be easy for them to do, and everyone would assume it was some 15-year old kid from Sacramento.
The lack of American understanding of the region is truly scary. While the main army of the Iraqi governement is antiquated and built for open battles (in which the US will dominate), where the iraqis will make their impact felt is in discretionary warfare and urban combat. The American media seems to still tow the official government line that no civilians are fighting against americans, and its all regulars and paramilitaries discarding uniforms to fight. While this may be largely the case, there seems to a totall unwillingness to admit that civilians might actually want to stand up and defend their country themselves. Regardless of how you feel about your leader, if foriegn troops (especially those of a nation with the kind of reputation america has in the mideast) were marching through your backyard, bombing your town (regardless of target), killing your country's soldiers, you would probably want to fight back and rally around your leader. Though a far more mild character, Bush had an approval rating in the low 30's before september 11. I heard a lot of nasty stuff from people about him. Yet, after 9/11, he had an approval rating in the 80s. It reminds me of the first media reports out of Vietnam. According to them, everyone loved Diem and America and hated communism. Yet it wasn't the north that bled the US out of vietnam, it was common peasants in the Viet Minh in the south. People supported Ho Chi Minh not because he was a communist, but because he was one of them. He stood up for them against the japanese, the french and the americans. He fought the invader.
now that was a rambling message!
I think I'd pick DDOS over fiber than having every last transistor in my studio turned back into sand...
Thank-you for the link; We had not seen that pic.
How to access -other- photo's like it, eg at the
same site & elsewhere?
TIA
I'll have to agree. I need some boots because it is getting deep in here. Check out this little tidbit.
The US could have fixed this problem twelve years ago when they had a valid reason to go into Iraq, however they pulled back leaving the kurds and Shi'ites to swing in the wind,
Where the heck do you get your history WE HAD TO STOP. The resolution that was passed was ONLY to kick his sorry butt out of Kuwait. We did try to get the UN to remove him them they would not do it! Don't blame that one on the USA blame it on the countries that refused to authorize it. Just like this time. The funniest thing about it you are trying to morally lambaste the USA for not breaking the UN resolutions last time and taking him out . But that is what we are doing right now and the USA is still wrong. Can you see the irony here? I really believe you are just using this as a handy example to do some trendy USA bashing. You seem to not even have thought about it.
America has no support for this war because it did not try to diffuse the situation. George Bush never met with Saddam and gave him clear requests, such as no more human rights violations, destruction of weapons in exchange for the repeal of the sanctions. Diplomacy is not telling the leader of a sovereign nation to leave within 2 days or there will be war. We are a bad as he is, we declare an illegal war with out UN approval or any real hard evidence. Great foster terrorism, make Iraqis experience what september 11 was to us only far worse. Destroy the country but say hey we will make it all better. Get real, none of the countries against the war have any deals look it up the french gave those up when they agreed to sanctions in 1991. The weapons we gave him were of the worst kind, the ones we could not use under weapons treaties, umm anthrax, VX gas, sarin, tabun(sp), technology to build nuclear weapons remember coalition forces found american equipment in Iraqi labs, at a time when the market was flooded with soviet era stuff not 1980's generation american stuff. The issue is not the war, it is not Saddam it is the refusal of George Bush to at least try to save lives and make nice with our neighbors.
Imagine the government paying the 1337 script kiddies out there to bring down an Arab TV network's site in this time of war. $$$$
I'm sure posting it on slashdot doesn't help it all, either.
--
Adobe's anti-counterfeiting softw
http://www.islam.org/ have live feed of al jazeera for $9.95 Quality is good if you have broadband. (check live tv 2)
Also some other sites have live feeds see http://slate.msn.com/id/2080681
Are you a fuckin moron?
That right wing "anti american" website was founded by the fuckin people who are in power now.
Scroll to the bottom of this page
Here, I will list them for you:
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
So while you call me stupid, cos you are an anon idiot. Its fine that you can rant away about your beliefs on why it is right to defend ourselves. but the facts are, these right wing whackos, while I will agree, are Anti American . They are also currently in charge of this country.
I dont see how you can refute this? Do you need more links?
congrats on the posting which managed to be light on the rhetoric and well linked to substantial claims of fact
however, as this is an american-based and american dominated site, and it still seems that the majority of americans do not want to be presented with the evil that the U.S. of A. government and it's corporations are perpetrating in the world, i fear you are now about to be modded all the way down
So is depleted uranium ammo (just look at what happened in Bosnia)... so if you really care about the environment you'd be out there protesting about this war.
For an objective view of the war you might want to check out reuters.com or that Iraqi guy's blog. Or even al Jazeera, since it shows things that CNN is silent of.
"While I am certain many h4x0rs are political, I can't help thinking that script kiddies are like moths to the flame of rising page views"
Would you say the same about all these people? from this story? Somehow I can't help but to chuckle on the fact that if it's for your POV, they're serious hackers, but if they're against it, they're "script kiddies". Whoa, I must be in Slashdot-ville, population: You.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
How about a "DNS lookup of Death"?
I've never seen _this_ type of karma whoring before. Tnx! ~:-)
My other Beowulf cluster is... er...
It looks like http://www.iraqinews.com has also been hit.
al-Jazeera is the Fox News of the Arab world or Fox news is the al-Jazeera of the Western world.
Because they broadcast videos of surrendered coalition forces? How is that different from BBC, CNN etc. showing videos of surrendered Iraqis?
BEcause they show pictures of dead coalition troops? How is that different from the pictures of dead Iraqis we have seen in elsewhere?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
Very well spoken... you basically took my thoughts and expressed them far more eloquently than I could have. Bravo!
I'm a lawyer, but not yours. I wouldn't represent someone who thinks taking legal advice from Slashdot is a good idea.
Ah, I understand. You do not want to see negative stories about your country.
So I take it you would rather not have the Washington Post blow the whistle on the Watergate scandal, or have any of the media investigate corporate toxic scandals (like that will ever happen), or anything else unpleasant about the all-American America?
Anyone who think Fox News is actually "Fair and Balanced" is either lobotomized or lying through their teeth. It's that simple.
Hi! I found this picture that describes in some detail President Bush's plan to raise Iraqi opinion of the USA and help ease tension in the hopes of reducing terrorist threat.
I notice Salon.com also ran a story on the site getting hacked, but they refused to put a link to the web site. I guess they figured it wasn't relevant.
I hope they edit the Gore away in 2004.
I saw something kind of odd last night on CNN. At the close of one of the news personalities nightly shows (I believe it was Aaron Brown), they ran a piece (with dubed translation) from al-Jazeera over the Brittish actions in umm Qasar. The reporting of that particular story seemed rather fair and straight forward. If it hadn't been for the origional arabic language and writing, I might have mistaken it for a BBC piece.
Now the interesting bit is that Aaron Brown pointed out that their newsroom monitors al-Jazeera and other networks. That they would pick an al-Jazeera piece to air... over a relatively minor story... seems to indicate a certain nod of approval to the Arabic network.
Sure. Bias exists. But perhapse there is enough truth to be recognized by professionals no matter what side of the bias divide they favor.
Thanks for the thanks. No negative mods yet.
I'm an American, and I love the U.S. very much. I know that, when someone truly loves something, he or she will not fail to give attention when things go wrong.
A lot of Americans feel the way I do. Most Americans do not understand. TV stations in the U.S. are often owned by companies that also make weapons. TV news here is almost all about how wonderful it is to have a war. The cost is money is never discussed. The number of people killed on the other side is never discussed.
Hmmm... I decided to see if it was true that the aljazeera.net was being blocked, so I first tried my university web service. It was a no-go. Next, I tried my roommate's cablemodem. Still blocked. Then, I went through German and British web proxies. Nope. Then I tried this proxy in Jordan (80.90.161.202:80). Finally, the website came up. I'm not able to get an english version, and I can't read it in arabic (www.aljazeera.net), so I'm translating it into Russian, which babelfish handles, and reading it that way (www.aljazeera.ru). Hope this helps.
why is this chilling at all? US domination? so what? im all for it and im totally behind wolfowitz and pre-emption, its the strategically correct thing to do to preserve our way of life. the world would be one big USA and thats way better than what it is now.
Seems like the Iraqy has taken a leaf out of the russian bok - trading land for time until they engage in a decicive battle and / or can attack the lines of supply. I fear that the war will be longer and bloodier than the REMF's in Pentagon cared to believe before they started.
In other news, US troops have seized an airfield in norther Iraq, presumable to open a second front. This may serve to shorten the war considerably, but it may also trigger Saddam and his chums to deploy chemical weapons sooner than they would otherwise have done.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Then why are you against taking out the man who kills more children than anyone else? Saddam Hussein kills more children before lunchtime in a single day than will be killed in this whole war. If your heart cries out for the murdered innocent children, you need to be for this war! Saddam has used bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents.
Your way of "peace" only allows the merciless persecution and impoverishment of Iraqis to continue. Why is the justification for this war so hard to understand? Saddam has killed over 100,000 people. This is a rescue mission. It is a war of compassion to end a holocaust.
You wanted to give diplomacy more time?
"You just arrived. You're late. What took you so long? God help you become victorious. I want to say hello to Bush, to shake his hand. We came out of the grave." - liberated Iraqi
Listen to the account of a reformed anti-war protester who went to Iraq:
This is the same argument the Soviets pulled out of their asses being represented here. Because the Sovs had a news media (completely government controlled), a Congress of sorts (completely under control of the CPSU), and opportunity for 'criticism' (only allowed in the context of Marxism-Leninism), they were the equivalent of a Western capitalist society in terms of liberty and quality of supplied information.
We knew that was bullshit then, but 20 years later we have forgotten and are apparently attempting to attach the same legitimacy that the Soviets craved to the one-dimensional party line foisted by Al-Jazeera. Just because they aren't Communists doesn't mean that they should be taken seriously. They are every bit as bad as any State-run media that has ever existed. Goebbels would have been proud.
I consider the Arabian peninsula and its environs the functional equivalent of the Soviet Empire. Divided? Sort of. Monolithic in culture and attitude? Pretty much. Totalitarian? Just about.
Have we gotten dumb? Did everyone forget? Societies lacking liberty will not have a free press. The drivel they put out is barely worth listening to, except maybe as an indicator of the monolithic thought within that totalitarian regime.
I'm not going to be an apologist for US media. They suck, but not because US CITIZENS embedded in US FORMATIONS are saying 'we'. Mainly because they'll dredge up any piece of horseshit that is negative about the war effort and slap it on US screens. Let's see Al-Jazeera try that though, putting up negative stuff about Saddam's prison camp of a nation. Yeah right, I thought so.
You should be ashamed of yourselves for giving them an ounce of credence.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
so how did they get bombed in the first gulf war?
How about everyone email cnn World@MSNBC.com ect ect and let them know that the us government is blocking sites that they dont agree with. news companies dont like censorship
MODERATORS: mod the parent up, someone's actually trying to answer my question... Likewise with other posts that try to investigate the issue with more than conjecture or invective or the obvious /.'ed snark.
Thanks.
Damn those pesky terrorists
Al-Jazeera has changed DNS providers. Their "whois" data changed in the last update. Datapipe and Nav-Link are out, MyDomain is in. Four different DNS servers are listed, in different netblocks.
They've also switched to the Telia backbone. Telia is Scandanavia's largest backbone carrier, and is headquartered in Sweden.
It looks like they're getting the connectivity problem fixed. They're still on overload, with frequent "connection refused" messages, but sometimes you can get through.
I guess at the end of the day, it's important not to sink down into the details without first deciding on the big picture. And that is pretty straight forward no matter what news source you rely on.
Do we need to get rid of Saddam? Yes
Is Bush waging this war for the Iraqi people? No
Is the risk to homeland security from Iraq such that it justifies spending $100bn and risking lives of hundreds of thousands of soldiers? No (do you know how many people you can save with that kind of money? Invested in medical research alone you would have saved many thousands of Americans)
Was Saddam able to attack anyone when the cost of the world to contain him was placing a few weapons inspectors? No
Bottom line: is this war justified?
You decide.
You might also want to consider www.jihadunspun.com that covers more than 40 media also does its own translation from local media. And it only covers news that is about the so called war against terrorism.
Yeah of course he has to abuse it:
He gives Oil and is getting Food for his country. Nothing else, no money nothing. He has to abuse this because of the stupid sanctions.
Perhaps my ability to replace letters with numbers isn't quite up to par with others, but it seems that there are too many 3's in there.
Wow it only shows your bad education in the public nothng else. How do you call what the jews in israel are doing to palestinians year in year out ?
The chemical weapons you claim they have - they don't have. It's only a rumour from USA only to justify their narrowminded doings. 8days of war now and the allied troops still haven't found any weapons of mass destruction. No biological, chemical or nuclear weapons.
The missiles they are launching actually are missiles that the UN has allowed them to have. They are not SCUD rockets as described by CNN and then denied afterwards they are chinese rockets with a range from 150-180 KM and some al samoud rockets that they don't have destroyed - luckely. If they have then they couldn't even defend themselves.
Who decides that "one big USA" is better than what it is now? Maybe you americans are the judges of the truth?
Fundamentalists are the ones that thinks the only truth is what they think, all others are wrong.
Dangerous fundamentalists are the ones that tries to impose their view of the world through violence.
USA (or should I say Bush) is tring to impose its view of the world killing thousands of peoples.
This is exactly what Bin Laden tried to do on 11th september.
I see no difference between Bin Laden way of acting and Bush's way of imposing his view to the rest of the world.
If you see some, please explain me.
http://www.aljazeerah.info/
It contains also links from the main arab sources. I don't know if is really the TV station because actually I read also the http://english.aljazeera.net (this is down since the other one is up) and is really not keeping the same tone. They are more anti-american as the first version was... But it worths a look.
Anyway if you have the ability to mix up information you will be able to put up your own opinion based on all the news.
Also I have noted a very big difference between CNN, FOX and other stations. Just look at the NOTE from the end of CNN's pages on war pages. MSNBC, on the other hand, seems to balance the lack of accurate information with stronger opinion articles and editorials.
Do you live in a terrorist Nation? Then fear us. If you don't, then why are you jealous?
What is a 'terrorist nation'? There are terrorist groups in every country (the US not being an exception). And I don't think many people are feeling jealous for not being american.
America was burned on 9/11 (or 11/09), not your country. We have every right to defend/protect ourselfs from the likes of you. We didn't start this war, you did.
Yes, something terrible happend on 9/11. I agree on that. But your government is using that as an excuse to attack Iraq. Iraq != Osama Bin Laden. And yes, your country started this war. This war is no more than a smokescreen to evade attention on the great failure ni finding the real responsibles for the 9/11 attack.
My site
that they won't show any information that might hurt the us or the us army.
GWB et al stated their intention to attack Iraq before 11/9. We all need that oil and no matter what the smokescreen we have to get it. It does not matter who gets the money (read "Iraq will get the proceeds to pay the American companies rebuilding their country after it is destroyed). There is no oil left under the US and the only good reserves left are under Iraq.
Iraq has nothing to do with 11/9 or terrorism. They have always refused to allow Al Qaida into their country and only now that the US/UK controls sections have Al Qaida been able to hide in those parts outside Iraq control.
America has been funding terrorism for a long time and even now the trial of IRA gun smugglers going on in Florida does not use the term terrorist because they want to continue to deny that America has such a tradition of support for terrorists.
I do fear the US but not because I have anything to fear them for. They have, as a nation, gone mad. They attack countries for fictitous reasons and in doing so kill innocent people. I am an innocent person and I therefore fear them.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
n/t
not really a whinge but... Arabic is really wuite easy to learn. I am not so good with languages, but thought arabic script looked cool, so thought I'd see if I could learn a little. And guess what, it was really quite easy to pick up (yeah, I speak a little french, a little german, but I had so much trouble learning that little). Now, I am not fluent is arabic, I can speak a little, and can read more, but it is easy. Their spelling is phonetic, so basically if you can read it you can speak it (I can read more than I can speak because of grammar rules, just like I can read and understand RPG, but couldn't really code it). Anyway, the point of this is... arabic does have vowels, they just tend to be dropped in script, as they really aren't that necessary. No idea of the historic reasoning behind that, but, being cynical, I would say the script looks nicer and cleaner, if you drop the vowels. Just thought I'd say.
The best is the enemy of the good
Looks like they read those russian books wrong ;)
Iraqis do not have vast territory to retreat from.
They don't have cold winter to try to freeze unprepared enemys.
They don't have woods to hide partisans in.
Lines of supply are fine to target, but coalition have transport aviation to resupply remote troops.
Well, maybe they read their book upside down ;)
It's cliched I know but: then you Americans wonder why the rest of the world hates you. Who the hell are you to say the USA has the right to dominate the rest of the planet? You'd preserve your way of life much more effectively if you spent less time pissing the rest of the world off.
I don't hate Americans as a people (I know and like quite a few US individuals), but the neo-conservative faction in control right now - Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle etc. - deserve nothing but contempt. They'll destroy the world in their cynical attempt to dominate it.
How To Read Al Jazeera In English
Basically...
1) Go Here
2)Translate http://www.aljazira.it from italian to english
You may now mod me up.
PS. Use RPN whenever possible!
I think we are seeing now in the creation of the 51st state
LOL. Yeah, just like temporary military rule turned Japan into the 51st state. Oops, that makes Iraq the 52nd state. Oh yeah, I forgot, we also conqured Afghanistan. That makes Iraq the 53rd state. Wait a minute, I forgot South Korea. Iraq is what, the 54 state? 55th? 56th?
You can certainly be opposed to the war, but assuming the US does in fact win the war then what would you suggest they do differently than described in the NY times article? If the Sadam government is gone then you need some sort of government to avoid anarchy and disaster. When a war ends the military is in defacto control of the country. It then takes time to create and transition to a new local government.
Suggesting that the US will not transfer control over to a local government is at best totally unfounded speculation. The US has publicly declared that it will hand over control to the Iraqis and that they will not take any of the oil. If the government broke either of those commitments it would be crucified internationally and domesticly.
I can understand some people have fears of "colonialism", but it is simply not the way the US works.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Isn't it intended to provoke Iraq into using chemical or biological weapons? That would show to the world that the US was right all along (assuming they are right) and also provide an excuse for countries such as France to get on side. Of course, the politicians will never admit that this is an aim , and if Iraq does use such weapons it's unlikely they would be so polite as to restrict it to a token attack.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
No one is against that, but that's just an excuse that Bush et al use - they don't give a flying fuck about dead Iraqi children. What they do care about, according to Rumsfeld, is oil.
Any geologist will tell you that since 1965 the world has discovered only one barrel of oil for every two consumed. American oil production is in decline (including Alaska) so is the oil production of:
Plus, Venezuela has suddenly stopped being a reliable source.
The only parts of the world which are not in decline and producing significent amounts of oil are the Middle East and Russia.
The US needs Iraq's oil and needs it urgently so that major production (~3x current Iraq levels) can be brought on line before the oil price starts to skyrocket. It may be true that they could just buy it of Saddam but that would leave someone else's hand on the tap once the crunch comes. That is a threat to the US way of life that Donald, Dick, George, and Condaleezza (all big-time oil people) won't allow.
Iraq will also serve as a base for attacking Saudi Arabia if and when it finally collapses into militant Islamic civil-war (peacekeeping forces, of course. Making those oil wells. peaceful will be very important).
Rumsfeld has planned for this war for years and has, until it started, made no secret of the fact that it was about oil and that he just wanted an excuse to go in. He wanted to go in on 9/12, before any evidence could have been in that Iraq had anything to do with the previous day' events. As it turned out, 9/11 was a Saudi-based plot but we have to all pretend it wasn't at least until the US have a major military base in the region, and its own major oil supply, and can start talking tough.
Dead or tortured children have nothing to do with this war except as a way of getting saps to support it. Rumsfeld didn't give a toss about people being gased when he shook Saddam's hand and told him he'd try to get him some biological weapons to go with the chemical ones he was already using and that the nice CIA men were helping to "calibrate" for him.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Mod this post up - informative
Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
http://cryptome.org/us-blackout/us-blackout.htm
and go to anti-war sites. Robert Fisk has one. Oh, they`re all over the place. Just not too many of them in America.
Iraqis do not have vast territory to retreat from.
They don't have cold winter to try to freeze unprepared enemys.
They don't have woods to hide partisans in.
Lines of supply are fine to target, but coalition have transport aviation to resupply remote troops.
They do have some hard and useless terrain to retreat from (desert). They do have some nice climatologic things coming up: sandstorms, a nice sunny and dry summer... And transport aviation is nice, but useless in sandstorm season...
They don't have cold winter...
But they have a hot summer.
Looks like they read those russian books wrong ;)
Iraqis do not have vast territory to retreat from.
Coalition combat troops only number 100,000 (the remainder are support personnel), which in a country the size of Iraq is a very small number. Don't forget that the Axis and Soviet armies that fought on the Eastern front numbered many millions.
They don't have cold winter to try to freeze unprepared enemys.
The desert drops to below freezing every night, while the late Spring, Summer and early Autumn are too hot for conventional forces to operate in.
They don't have woods to hide partisans in.
Which is why they are drawing the coalition forces into urban fighting, as it's incredibly costly for the attacker. This is something the Russian forces found out in Stalingrad, Budapest and Berlin, but judging by the assault on Grozny they failed to learn the lesson.
Lines of supply are fine to target, but coalition have transport aviation to resupply remote troops.
Open desert is no place to land large transport planes, and helicopters simply don't have the capacity to supply even the meagre coalition forces. With small mobile groups of Iraqi irregulars roaming the deserts, even if transport planes could land there the coalition would be taking a huge risk. Transport planes make an easy target for even the most primitive surface to air missile.
Chris
The irony of a great civilization being humiliated with the fruits of its own technological achievements...
or,
The irony that we're all in the same boat, but instead of rowing together we beat each other with our oars...
I opine the flourishing of irony in recent times truly does portend its death. From the broader perspective of the last ((I)) years, the strong murder the weak, lies are exposed and forgotten, the strong murder the weak, lies are exposed and forgotten.... It fails to amuse. "Civilisation. Ha ha. Uh, guess you had to be there." Think I'm going to reread that Annie Dillard book. Brrr.
The Daily Telegraph is also well known for its political stance, jokingly known as "The Daily Torygraph" (Tory party = Conservative Party, the main right wing UK political party - the Telegraph is the party's 'unofficial voice' and will follow the party line). It would be worthwhile noting that the Telegraph has long viewed the BBC as having a left-wing bias. Hence it's a good point that you make - reporters and their media are never neutral, and once you're trying to find out what's happening through several biased filters it all gets quite difficult. Daily Telegraph reporter with his bias reporting on the BBC reporter with their bias reporting from the UK-US military post with their bias. Yup, the expression "Chinese Whispers" springs to mind...
The most frightening page I have ever seen (http://www.newamericancentury.org).
h tm) an anaolgy is made that likens the world to the American wild west. Specifically as depicted in the film "High Noon". In the Authors view the "townsfolk" are the same as the objecting masses and the American military is the biggest gun on the block who keeps the peace and order (Marshall Will Kane - played by Gary Coooper). What is more disturbing than the leap of logic it actually takes to buy into this line of reasoning is not the fact that so-called foreign policy "think tanks" make arguments based on hollywood westerns, but, the fact that they are actually taken seriously at all!
If I'm reading their "thesis" correctly, it advocates for a lawless world free from such institutions like the United Nations, and the World Court, where true power is expressed militarily ie: A WORLD RULED BY FORCE.
If you read their most recent essay (http://www.newamericancentury.org/global-032303.
You can see the fruits of this mode of thought in the progress of the actual "war" in Iraq. Where the thousands of Rambo inspired troops were suprised when the "townsfolk" greeted them with a shower bullets instead of flowers and songs.
If anything should be DOS attacked it should be this site. http://www.newamericancentury.org
Ciao.
While you two wank over how wrong the other post is, someone else posted a link to the actual story that his comment was based on. He had the facts wrong but the basic point right - the US did bomb al-Jazeera offices. Of course he was wrong by a decade, unless by "first Gulf War" he meant the war in Afghanistan, which wasn't a "gulf war."
I can understand some people have fears of "colonialism", but it is simply not the way the US works.
</quote>
Ya, surely not.... Colonialism would imply US occupies a country by force and then installs a puppet government that will protect US political and economical interests. As we all know, US never considered that. Proof is Latin Amer.... Errrr.... nm
But then, reading most of the stuff there, looking around, checking other sources, it seems that PNAC is actually an organization that seems to have these guys as founders, and that their goals are pretty much as stated on the website.
It could still be that the website is a hoax that just exaggerates the propositions of the real PNAC. I just find it very hard to believe that anyone who has grown up in a democracy can go to the extreme lengths that are being proposed on this website.
But then, researching it, it really seems like this website does represent the politics of the Bush administration. And that's really, really scary.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
They will not be crucified by anyone, except maybe from a few people from the arab world. And why is this? Because that is what EVERYONE will try to do. What do you think why countries like France and Germany want to 'help rebuild' Iraq? What do you think why they insist on it?
Because they know there's a $hitload of money in for them. Of course America will not grab the oil. American (and perhaps, some european) companies will. With the full consent of the new iraqi government. Why? Because the US will choose a government that will amen everything they do. Otherwise this war would have been in vain. They need to have access to the oil, but most of all, they need a stable base of operation in the region, and since the saudis are growing tired of US presence in their country, iraq looks like a good choice.
So, forget democracy in Iraq for quite some time to come. If all goes as people like Richard Perle hope, Iraq will have a new dictator from the close vicinity of Saddam Hussein.
And no, it's not colonialism. It's imperialism. It's exactly that "America First" doctrine that makes so many people(s) hate the USA. They keep talking of freedom and liberty, but they're only interested in geopolitical advantages. No wonder so many arabs feel sick when americans talk of freedom. They understand too well that it's not THEIR freedom the americans fight for, but rather the freedom of the western world to exploit the region to the fullest extend possible.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
The Irish Independent which has by far the biggest circulation in Ireland led with this girl and her mangled legs on the front page on Tuesday. A huge discussion ensued on the radio media. People can generally say what they want on radio here. I think the outcome was that it's OK to show "gruesome" images on the evening news after the watershed because it is the truth and responsible mature audiences should have the option of seeing all sides of this conflict.
cL0h
No, son, that's not how capitalism works. See, we here in the western world have prosperity and wealth because we take stuff away from other countries and people. We exploit and abuse the countries that have the resources we need. If they're willing to sell them to us, we give them a few bucks and tell them to shut up. If they don't, we just take their resources and don't pay them at all. That is why there always has to be "us" and "them". That is why the world can never be a big USA. That's why there will always be conflicts and wars.
And don't you think for one minute that the US' or any other western nation's gov has any interest in democratizing any of those nations. In fact, we, the western nations, have instantiated more dictators and despots than you can EVER imagine.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
It is quite interesting that this issue has spread into a political discussion. But the individual merits of different media seem a bit off-topic as part of this slashdot-comment discussion.
I would be much more interested in seeing more info on how the site is blocked (ie., is it really a DDOS attack, is it directed to the sites or to the DNS servers, could it be stopped merely by reconfiguring the DNS servers) and whether the routes are blocked too.
After we know that, we can start discussin if this is a case of international censorship and who is responsible for it.
And only then can we say who is trying to abolish such things as intellectual freedom, freedom of the speech, trans-frontier communication over the Internet etc. Only then, political discussion of this issue is possible.
But if we do want to turn this into a political discussion, I found it very interesting that many local media are talking about a cyberwar in terms of attacks of pacifist hackers agains american institutions' web sites. Has anybody seen any of that? Curious.
-Kvorg
This war is no more than a smokescreen to evade attention on the great failure ni finding the real responsibles for the 9/11 attack.
And in other news, Al Qaida announced that it is temporarily closing down their recruiting centers. Apparently they can't handle the influx of applicants that came forth in the last few weeks. In fact, they are running out of bombs to strap onto people. Normal terrorist operations will continue as soon as possible.
Seriously, I think if Bin Laden was in charge of the US he would hardly be more successfull in furthering the terrorist cause. The Bush administration simply excells in that field.
If they think that the current operations in Iraq will diminsh the threat from terrorism and make the world safer for the US, they must be smoking something really really bad...
CHeck it out, its great.
oh and on a serious side, everyone knows CIA agents work in CNN (part time) wink wink
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
I get moderated FlameBait for suggesting the BBC coverage is extensive and impartial.
The Wall St Journal suggests the BBC seems to be doing a better job trying objective than US stations and is moderated insightful.
Well at the risk of further damage to my Karma I'll try again.
BBC News Online.
The BBC World Service is available by both streamed audio online and Radio World-Wide.
BBC News 24 is available on Digital Satellite thought the world.
They might not have vast territory, but it is easier to let the americans get in at large and hold them in war far from the bases. Also it is easier to guard a smaller territory.
They don't have cold winter, but they do have hot as hell summer, and the US it self, hurried this war so it would get over before the Iraq summer.
[]'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins
^[:wq
the DDOS attack is being directed at their name servers, and not the web server
So it should be to access the Website via IP if somebody can track it down.
This is true, but it didn't work in the Vietnam war, and it will work even less well in this one. Dispite official attempts to control the images coming out of Vietnam, it was the first time that images from war were shown on national media, and this is cited as a major factor in swinging public opinion against the war. In this case, any attempt at censorship will just backfire, as the truth (or at least, an number of divergant views) is much more likely to come out via the internet, and the censorship will just be revealed for what it is.
They think they can control this situation, but they are wrong, and it will all backfire. They are fucking up big time.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
You clearly don't know anything about this program. You clearly misunderstood (on purpose?) the way this 'worked'. It's not like the iraqis could sell their oil for money and just buy whatever they wanted.
Everything the iraqis wanted to buy ended up on a list controlled by UN officials. Absolutely everything. If they didn't ack it, tough. And they nack'ed a lot of stuff the iraqis wanted to buy. Among that chlorine to kill germs in the water.
Water is one of the biggest problems in Iraq. The biggest part of the population has no access to drinkable water, largely thnaks to the sanctions. Also there are reports the allies bombarded not only radar posts but also parts of the iraqi water supply chain. So much for your program.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
Or RPG for that matter, which amazingly apparently one hit and passed through a chinook recently without exploding. If it exploded that would be one lost Chinook, cargo, and crew.
Random starving guy in desert: +1
US Military: -$X,000,000
Asymmetry.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
You are clearly resorting to silliness and namecalling to protect your preconceptions from the onslaught of the truth. Ainsoph is exactly right. This utterly horrifying document has actually become national security policy.
It cannot be coincidence that since Coup2K the admin has implemented something like 90% of the policy recommendations of PNAC. The goals of the current admin are clearly in line with their vision of global strategy, which is simply to extend US global military and economic dominance as far into the future as possible.
It is to be noted that these guys don't apologize for this, they see it as a reasonable goal, and they feel that it justifies fighting "multiple theater wars, small wars, and constabulary actions", in other words, killing a lot of people.
Even if there is no direct connection between PNAC and the current admin, there is clearly an ideological connection, in that they share the same goals, and that they agree on the best means to achieve those goals.
GWB clearly states his response to 9/11. Do you live in a terrorist Nation? Then fear us. If you don't, then why are you jealous?
But the question is, who gets to decide what is a terrorist nation? Why, GWB does, of course. So what this statement amounts to is, "if I decide that I don't like you, fear my wrath!" This sounds like an extremely unreasonable message to be broadcasting to the rest of the world, and I think the world has reacted to it as such.
It seems obvious that only America and its closest allies could possibly support the vision of a world in which only the US wields military and economic power. Other nations are reacting with quite justified alarm at the rapid flare-up of blatant jingoism, imperialism, and xenophobia which has broken out in the US in response to Sept. 11.
Put it this way. During the rise of the Nazis to power, do you think the rest of the world were encouraged and comforted by Hitler's vision of a world in which Germany was the sole military and economic power? No way!
You can see how the current situation of overwhelming military advantage would present a temptation far too strong to resist to those already deeply corrupted by the exercise of near-absolute power.
When right-wing extremists start spouting this sort of extremely dangerous bullshit, that's one thing, but when 90% of it is implemented as national security policy, then it's time to start stocking up on imperishable food supplies. This is no joke. They're really going to do it this time. One world, one reich, one Fuhrer. And who's to stop them?
My site: Free Nature Pictures
I haven't, but I believe in freedom of speach no matter what they happen to show on al-Jazeera.
Freedom of speach is not limited to saying nice things. It also allows people to say rather horrible and unpleasant things. But since we don't all agree on what is horrible and what is not, it has to be like that.
Jacob
PS: IMO freedom of speach is not the same as freedom from responsibility.
PPS: Considering the current actions of USA, UK and DK (did I leave anybody out?), I find it hard to disapprove of people who call USA "The Great Satan".
"There is nothing worse than having only one drunk head."
Ainsoph, relax. Of course this guy is a fuckin moron. But calling him names will not help the credibility of our case, the one you and I and many other pacifists and reasonable people of conscience are trying so hard to make in this debate. I think it is incumbent upon us to make our case as maturely and intelligently as possible. These discussions are important. Slashdot is arguably the most imporant forum on the net, and 500 years from now historians (assuming there are still historians 500 years from now) will analyze these discussions to see what the digerati thought. I want it to go down in history that when the shit hit the fan, I stood up on slashdot and made a strong case for pacifism, with intelligence, maturity, and respect for all parties, and that I made it well and in no uncertain terms.
How do you want history to remember you?
Having said that, it's understandable that you are upset, this guy is clearly a fuckin moron.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
That a middle-eastern news agency who is decidedly critical of the US Government is claiming to be protected under the US Constitution's right to freedom of the press.
Sorry, Al Jazeera.... if you want a guaranteed freedom of the press, go talk to your own government.
Aljazeera.net was vuln to a Unchecked buffer in Windows component could cause web server compromise. http://www.packetstormsecurity.nl/advisories/micro soft/ms03-007 .
BlooDMASK
Levigo Groups Software developper.
Another legacy of fighting on the Eastern Front in World War II is the RPG. Simple and effective, it's an updated version of the German "Panzerfaust", a one shot bazooka that was simple to make, simple to operate and destroyed thousands of Allied tanks.
While it isn't as sophisticated and doesn't have the range or accuracy of the infantry missiles used by the coalition forces, it's very useful. The Russians found out the hard way how good it was, when the Afghans started using captured RPG's against tanks and other vehicles.
Chris
Awww, you big patriotic troll you... And you wonder why some people react with terrorism?
Threaten our autonomy, threaten our culture, threaten OUR way of life, and we will go to terrible lengths to return the favor. If the U.S. had bothered to consider 9/11 a symptom, not a disease in itself, it could have avoided this slow erosion of freedoms. Instead, with every bombing raid more and more potential terrorists are created - forcing your once-free country to become a paranoid police state.
Hee-hee. Dying tickles!
Yes we did encourage and help Iraq attack Iran, remember this was the Cold War era we couldn't openly attack the USSR so we picked the opposite side. I do recall mentioning that in my last post. There is nothing hypocritical about cleaning up a mess that we had a hand in making.
In other worlds when you shit in your own bed, don't just lay in it crying. Don't sit there get up and clean up your mess, and that's exactly what what we're doing right now. Like it or not it's the right thing to do. Ignoring the problem and hoping the bad people will go away will only make things worse in the long run.
The tired arguments I was talking about were the ones on the news UN resolutions, 12 years of non-compliance yadayadayada. As far as the same tired arguments. What are the "brand new" reasons for going to war. Like it or not humans haven't changed much in ten thousand years, and the reasons for war haven't changed at all.
What horrible grammar!
http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/
http://www.canada.com/national/features/iraq/
http://iraq.ctv.ca/
Pretty well balanced sites IMHO.
CrazyLegs
"Pork!!" said the Fish, and we all laughed.
You can count on Al Jazeera TV and web site to promote the viewpoint of the "Arab Street." These are the same people you saw dancing in the streets on 09/11/2001. Get a clue folks. For real, objective analytical reporting of the middle east, there is only Debka file.
Warning: Reality is very graphic: http://italy.indymedia.org/news/2003/03/224418.php
Heard it on Morning Edition. In one breath I finally hear about a news source from an Arabic viewpoint with an English-language feed, and then that it's been zapped by vandals. I'd like to believe no U.S. citizens were involved in this crime. Certainly this sort of vigilante censorship is against the principles that *I* stand for.
Can you identify 1 fucking speech, comment or remark from Cheney, Bush or Ashcroft where they have suggested that anti-war protesters or people otherwise against the war are unamerican? I can't.
The debate wasn't polarized by them, the debate was polarized long long ago, and this is just the latest chapter in the "debate" between the left & right in this country and persons who agree/disagree with them on some specific issue.
Copyright 2003 - Al Jew-zeera Newscorp.
KUWAIT CITY -- Pork fat is the number one choice of lubricants for the unit of American soldiers assigned to rape Iraqi women.
"It tastes great, and it helps us slide our cocks right into their quivering assholes" states Lt. John Holmes. "Those hairy smelly bitches are so uptight that we need something that is really heavy duty to drive home the point that Americans really are superior to these rag-head camel jockeys."
Questions about the insertion of the unit of the U.S. Army's Special Forces Rape Battalion raged in the arab world. Haji Mubarak, spokesman for Arabs Supporting Saddam (ASS) stated, "Only we are allowed to treat our women like shit! Now they will have a taste of two forbidden fruits -- long, thick American cock and pork! This is an insult to our culture! Jihad! Jihad against the Americans!"
Gen. Tommy Franks refused to answer questions about the issue at the CENTCOM briefing given yesterday at headquarters in Qatar. "Who gives a fuck about those sand niggers? It can only improve them as a people. I just hope those men who get crabs from those filthy arab whores get the Purple Hearts they deserve. They are really going into harm's way. They should be grateful we haven't stolen the Kaabaa and turned it into a cruise missle."
Amnesty International decried the unit's deployment. Spokeswoman Jennifer Stover stated, "This is clearly a violation of the Geneva Convention. The use of pork fat as a lubricant when raping muslim women is extremely offensive to notions of islamic culture. Besides, ever since I've been involved with Amnesty International, I haven't been able to find a good man anywhere. I want the first shot at those American cocks myself. Jesus, I could use a good fucking right now. These faggoty pacifist lefty men I work with can't get it up unless you go through the whole "dominant Hillary" scene with them. It's such a fucking drag."
Al-Jewzeera Reporter Rocco Genovese will be embedded with the U.S. Army's Special Forces Rape Battalion. His reports will be available from the field on our website and in the upcoming gonzo video series, "Dirty Arab Sluts of Iraq".
UN weapon inspections:
Is CNN biased in its choice of stories? Definitely Yes.
Comparatively, that would make Slashdot unbiased toward Microsoft.
Happily, we are getting real news in Canada. In other words, nothing is being censored by US government pigs. So if you want some real information, and not the sugared, toned down lies of the US media, read Canadian newspapers and sites.
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!"
Lovely. let freedom ring by hacking any news outlet that doesn't toe the Pentagon party line. Go America.
It's hard to pretend that Al Jazeera is unbiased, but it's also hard to pretend that there has ever been unbiased news coverage. Thanks to the web, we can easily create "compsite" news coverage for ourselves, by taking in various biases, which works like shining a flashlight on something from various angles: eventually, you'll have seen most of it. or at least it allows me to satiate my desire to think I'm getting a somewhat accurate picture of what's happening.
Reason online had this great article about the role of al jazeera in this conflict the other day. worth a read.
And I suppose King George III declaring war on the thirteen colonies pretty much solved England's problems with the the revolutionaries.
And Saddam's waging war on Kuwait solved his problems too. And invading Afghanistan solved the USSRs problems, and North Korea declaring war on South Korea solved their problems.
I shake my head in wonder at the almost total ignorance of history exhibited by people who claim to have studied it or who tell others to go read a history book.
- CreationLTD
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. George Orwell - "1984"
http://www.aljazeerah.info works, is english, and is fast.
It has all the pictures, cartoons etc.
It wasn't DOS'd after displaying pictures of "mangled" Iraqi children.
It was DOS'd after displaying photos of executed US Soldiers.
I doubt this is being reported anywhere. I work at the National Press Building in downtown D.C. Al-Jazeera has an office in the building. On Tuesday at about 6:00PM I noticed that our connection to our ISP's router was not responding. We have a 100mb line directly to an ISP in the building's main router (we buy bandwidth by the megabit from them). Most offices in the building buy per seat connectivity and phone service from them. I talked to their head network admin, who knew that there was an attack going on against 'a news agency in the building', but their IDS system wasn't picking it up. It turns out that someone was using an unsecured (no WEP) wireless access point to gain access to the network. Someone in the building plugged in a WAP and just didn't configure it at all. Now I'm not entirely sure that it was Al-Jazeera getting attacked, but I'm willing to bet it was.
I believe the argument starts with a false premise, namely that war can solve the problem to begin with. It's an appealing idea because people don't like complicated problems, and the idea that you can just step in to "solve" it in one swoop simplifies things. Unfortunately, the situation is far too complicated for that - Iraq currently resembles the former Ygoslavia more than, say, post WW II Japan.
Any solution will be messy, long, and complicated. Afghanistan has not been solved - it is now a loose group of warlords who still have skirmishes. The difference is that now girls can go to school and travel is more dangerous because there are more bandits who will rob or kill. The only thing that war did was start the long complicated negotiation process (in which the U.S isn't interested in participating).
Iraq won't be any better. It consists of at least three main ethnic groups who hate each other (in Yugoslavia, they didn't hate each other 'till the war started), and even more sub-groups (after the no-fly zones were established, the Kurds were free to start fighting each other - they finally reached a peace of sorts a few years ago, but there are still a number of groups who have different goals for Kurdistan).
The totalitarian authority was the only thing keeping open civil war from tearing the country apart. Some expect the Shiite majority to start "ethnically cleansing" the south as soon as they're certain the Baath officials are powerless and the invading army has turned its back. Then you will see U.S and U.K soldiers faced with the problem of fighting against and killing the very people they claimed they were liberating.
Now, for the solutions.
The sanctions were not the answer. They can be effective politically only for a few years, after which the authorities take what they need from the people, and the civilians suffer. First step would be to lift the non-military trade embargo. But not all at once.
The lifting of sanctions should be tied to very specific actions of the Iraqi government. Actually, this is one of the things that cheesed off Iraq - the weapons inspectors claimed they were about 80% finished with the inspectors when they were pulled out, yet 100% of the sanctions were left in place. Lifitng of sanctions should have been tied to specific inspection and human rights reform goals.
Although Hussein had delusions of power and goals of conquest, he showed quite clearly that he learns from his mistakes. After Iran, he learned not to attack a bigger country, so he chose Kuwait next. After Kuwait, he quickly learned that attacking other countries is frowned upon. Knowing that, he could have been contained indefinitely, so he no longer posed a real military threat to other countries, as long as basic weapons inspections were maintained (as with the U.S and U.S.S.R).
The next problem was the Iraqi people. There are and were a number of countries in the same situation. Generally, Stalinist countries that have successfully reverted to democracy have done so after political stability was acheived, and a reasonable standard of living was introduced (Stalinist countries tend to reach that point quickly, but maintaining it doesn't work too well long term). At that point, the country can even be partitioned elong ethnic lines peacefully (e.g. U.S.S.R or Czecheslovakia).
Iraq could have gone several ways, left alone. Many communist countries have moved on to elections and democracy, with varying success. Others, like China and Cuba, have maintained political communism, but adopted a capitalist economic system. Iraq
http://213.30.180.219/
English site still down.
Wake up Americans!
WAKE UP!
You should be grateful and willing to hear voices different from the ones of your media.
Let other voices speak!
Try to understand the truth listening to different opinions.
Many people in the world, not just islamic extremists now dislike, don't understand, even hate America.
The same people who cried for 9/11.
DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?
THIS WAR IS CRIME
And such a war can only divide and generate more terrorism.
Wake up
Wake up...
wake up... please
Scene from Al-Jazeera Server room:
Aziz:"OK, Mohamad, I think that should fix it. Yes, we are back online."
Mohamad:"Yes, I'm starting to see trafic in the logs. Hey, what's 66.35.250.151 resolve to?"
Sound of typing
Mohamad and Aziz:"AUUUUGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
There are 01 kinds of cars in the world. The General Lee, and everything else.
A lot of ancient languages have written forms with no vowels. Normally they are superfolous anyways. Hebrew is probably the easiest example. Later sometimes you get people adding in the vowels to make it easier to deal with. Modern Hebrew (and I thought modern arabic too, though aparently I am wrong) has "hints" to tell you what the vowel actually is.
I'd do something interesting, but my server can't handle a slashdotting.
Or does arabnew.com or AJ show the mangled bodies of innocent people (including children) of Palestinian sucide bomb victims.
Frankly, I don't think Americans have any interest in having a 51st state, half way across the globe, constantly being attacked by extremists, and a half-century behind in technology and infrastructure (imagine the cost of bringing Iraq up to code for the Americans with Disabilities Act alone!). If they wanted the oil that badly, they could have taken it in 1991, or purchased it for a fraction of the cost of a war and permenant occupation.
Where's the benefit, except to radical right-wing idealists? I suspect American forces will be happy to leave Iraq by the time this is over.
American presidential elections are won by capturing the center of the political scale; People who gain a reputation for radical right-wing imperialism are unlikely to be re-elected.
Cheers,
-- RLJ
It's probably just slashdotted
The challenge here is that if you take one news piece to make your judgment about the integrity of an entire network, you open yourself up to an ill-informed bias.
If The AJ network were relegated by the US media to be fair as a standard, then they would, by your argument, show clips continually. The question that needs to be asked is, "What was it about this particular story that made it okay by the US media to air?"
Media as a generality across the world is more biased today than it was when my parents were my age. At one point in time (and I have studied this) news was based on factual recounts of a particular event. The 'norm' tended (not always, but more so than today) to be lacking emotional or personal agendas or entanglements from the reporter.
Today, we have reporters walking off the set in the middle of an interview because he did not agree with what the interviewee's political stance was. I find that it takes longer to decipher what "Dan Rather was really trying to say was..." than I do in getting actual, realistic, viable news. That's why I tend to lean more towards mediums such as Slashdot. I get to see comments from many different points of view. On TV you are told what you should think.
My hope is that no one EVER accepts the news today from ANY medium or network as the truth and at face value. Have some thoughts for yourself and do your research. Just because they say something or show something in a few isolated incidences, does not mean that is the whole picture.
I have been all over the world and have traveled to almost every continent and have spoken with countless amounts of people to learn about their cultures, political views, history, etc. and one thing that I have found time and again is that as societies are progressing, the need for verification of information is diminishing. We are, as a civilization, regressing and shying away from individual thought. We need to begin to think for ourselves and stop being reactionary.
Take a moment to take a deep breath, and then verify the information given to you. Never trust one source.
There is a slander campaign going on from all directions around the world. Be your own person and think for yourself.
Cheers
"Yeah, just like temporary military rule turned Japan into the 51st state."
Ummm, I believe Japan was the 49th state, with Alaska and Hawai'i 50 and 51, and Puerto Rico no. 52. We should probably not count Texas as a state anymore, but as a separate country currently occupying the U.S.
So counting Afghanistan and Iraq, my current count is 52 states (Japan appears to have seceded).
Who's gonna design that flag?
hi!
These campaigns always start off nice and clean, when the public attention is at it's highest. These surgical hits are cortesy of precise targetting information which the Americans have garnered before the war. After the war starts this information goes stale, as the enemy wise up and hide themselves better. As good as the technology is, smart munitions are fairly useless if you can't supply it with precise targeting information. So, if the resistance remains stuborn they will eventually have to resort to "dumb" bombing. (In fact they did carpet bomb a city in Afganistan towards the end of the campaign). The US PR machine will hope by this time that the public will have lost interest and/or got accustomed to civilan casualities.
Uhh, who said American's can't view these? Lots of slashdotters, like myself, are in the U.S. and many of them clicked on those links and viewed those photos without any problem.
And after viewing them, I can understand why the news wouldn't show them on television. I have never seen anything that gruesome on broadcast television in the U.S. Even on 9/11/01 there weren't photos of mangled bodies like that. Broadcast news isn't just sanitized to hide truths from the public (thanks to the internet that's virtually impossible) it's sanitized for the majority of viewers (especially those with children) who don't want to see that sort of carnage on the evening news.
There have been news reports about these images on U.S. television and radio news. If they were trying to cover up the facts they wouldn't even mention that shots of mangled children existed, would they?
awesome username. wish I had thought of that. ;) love da hot foodz
sneakerpimp
It's good to see that you support free speech.
The problem with the Western, and especially US, media, is not so much that they are deliberately biased but that they can't afford to upset the military and the Bush administration.
Think about it: do you toe the party line, and get rewarded with live reports of on-the-ground action from your "embeds", or do you occasionally upset the generals and get relegated to the back row of the press conference room in Qatar? Which do you think your shareholders would prefer? The result is that our "unbiased" news sources are really just feeding us US propaganda.
Al-Jazeera is just playing the same game from the other side. They want to get access to the Iraqi side of the action and in return they have to follow the Iraqi line. It doesn't make them less or more independent than any other news organisation; they're just playing under a different set of rules.
The military control of the Western press agenda is so obvious, it's surprising that the network anchors can keep a straight face. For example:
- Daily claims that various towns have been "secured", when clearly they haven't
- only reporting the (estimated) number of Iraqi combat casualties. We've only got Iraqi propaganda to go on how many US and UK casualties have happened.
- reporting as "fact" that Iraqis will use chemical weapons to defend Baghdad. Is this based on the same intelligence sources that claimed the Iraqis army would surrender, Saddam was dead and US forces would be welcomes as liberators?
- Describing Iraqis in civilian clothing who attack US military targets as "terrorists". Terrorists attack _civilians_ in order to spread panic and fear. Military targets from a country you're at war with cannot be anything other than legitimate. If US special forces infiltrated an Iraqi army base, would they be terrorists?
- Accepting uncritically the line that a find of chemical protection suits in Basra is "proof" that Iraq has chemical weapons. The science journal Nature (www.nature.com) reports that the US plans to use "riot control" gases, such as tear gas and sedatives, in urban areas. Given that, why wouldn't the Iraqi army want to protect itself?
The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
Heads up kids, this is now up on www.aljzazeera.net: http://members.networld.com/freedom2003/index.sb Someone please grab a copy while it's still up!
This is what I have also heard. al-Jazeera is "demonized by all the right people," and their reporters have been kicked out of Arab countries as well.
Their analysis is far from objective, but (again, as I understand it) they will take a news feed from anyone and put it on the air for all to see.
As far as using images of injured civilians to make their point -- that's the entire reason that they are against the war -- because it hurts innocent people. I don't find it odd that they would show the reason for their concern.
And God forbid that someone suggest that blowing the fuck out of each other isn't nice and won't make people like us.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
I wonder about details of Al-Jazeera's
web server setup. What server software are
they try to use, for example, and what
security holes were exploited?
Was the main hole the DNS database itself
and its administration?
How were DNS entries forged?
Not my words, but in the context of the article, by comparison with other Arab sources, it is. As for CNN, I watched them through the first Gulf War and was disgusted by their flag-waving jingoism.
That's the really scary part of this whole mess.
First, that A-J is considered rather factual and objective by way of comparison with most Arab media. So most Arabs on the street are getting a diet of information that would confound most Westerners.
Second, that CNN, which was considered overly jingoistic and pro-American during the Gulf War is now considered "too liberal" by much of the American public, fed a constant diet of right wing talk shows that play just as much on the emotions, ignore the facts, avoid deep investigations to the same extent as those deplorable Arab media sources.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Ahhh... Its true.. Thanks.. Normally I am quite sane. I very much appreciate the heads up. Late hours, strange world happenings, are all adding up.
The web hosting company shut down there contract. They were getting tons of hate mail and continued DDoS and were pushing over 300MB/s (I have an inside source) He is telling me now they are receiving hate mail and DDoS just because they canceled. I guess you never win. BTW, the company was Datapipe. Heres the link to the Yahoo story. Yahoo Story
A Thread on the NANOG list from Tuesday quotes Al Jazeera tech staff indicating that at that time they realized that they were under a DDoS attack.
The footage with offending video of US POWs was aired, I believe, on Sunday on Al Jazeera's satellite TV service. www.aljazeera.net (the Arabic site) was available all day Monday, and could be accessed in English through any of several translation sites, and to the best of my knowledge, contained at most a few still photos of dead soldiers, although I didn't see any when I browsed their news. Nor was it regularly being shown on their TV feed which could be viewed at that time as streaming video at http://winmedia.ish.de/al-jazeera.
Monday Al Jazeera also started its English language website at english.aljazeera.net, although I didn't find out about this until it was too late to see it.
At that time the only functional nameserver for aljazeera.net (the parent domain for both English and Arabic versions of the site) was at Dataport in NJ, and as of Tuesday morning, access to this server was administratively blocked at Dataport's firewall. Through calls to Dataport I learned that yes, the name server was accessable from within Dataport's network, and that administrative blocking of the nameserver was not a matter they would discus with me, referring me instead directly to Al Jazeera. The secondary nameserver for aljazeera.net is in France, and according to my colo provider who keeps tabs on these kinds of things, it's been inoperative for a while.
I contacted Pat Berry at the EFF who told me about the thread on NANOG, and at that point it looked as if possibly Dataport was working to resolve the DDoS problem - possibly also directed against them, I don't know. According to Pat, english.aljazeera.net was intermittantly available on Tuesday, after Dataport re-opened their firewall, but I wasn't able to get to it.
On Wednesday, the root DNS servers removed Dataport's name server for aljazeera.net and replaced it with one managed by AT&T Global Network Services in France. I have no idea whether this was the result of a request by Al Jazeera in an attempt to clear up the problem, or a result of Dataport explicitly deciding to stop hosting their nameserver. Apparently english.aljazeera.net is or was also hosted at Dataport in NJ. The new name server in France is not pingable, for what reason I have no idea, and to the best of my knowledge has never been pingable from either the US or Europe. I also note that the video gateway for Al Jazeera in Arabic at http://winmedia.ish.de/al-jazeera (Germany) is also now unavailable.
Whether all of this is the result of a coordinated hack (and DDoS attack), a domino effect from too much traffic, or something more sinister I don't know. Supposedly, according to word from people at the English web service, this is just the result of a traffic overload, and that it started Monday, but this contradicts the information on the NANOG list. The whole thing is beginning to smell rather distinctly of rat. There are people, whose opinions I respect, who claim that Al Jazeera is little more than a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda, but others disagree, and I know that Al Jazeera has been an excellent source of news on things such as ongoing deliberations at the UN regarding the war in Iraq which aren't being covered in the US press at all. It's a shame. It looks as if Al Jazeera may have become a cyber-war casualty.
Knowledge is power, and truth is the first casualty in wartime.
"Everything works if you let it" - The Flying Mouse
First where did the jews people come in here, you are just being Anti-Semantic there.
With the chemical weapons, why would the arm be takeing all the precotions aganst them if there were just a rumour, that would be a inefective way of going about the war.
...you need some sort of government to avoid anarchy and disaster...
that is what governments say all the time isn't it? i.e. you need the state. repeat after me: you need the state.
Hi all,
I actually did the first hack. I sent info on it to CNN & MSNBC. Time was 10:47PM MST Sunday.
The site was down until approx. 3:30AM MST. At least thats when I went to bed!
Once the site came back up the same holes where there! They must know nothing of security.
Some Quick info:
There are actually 2 servers being hosted in "FRANCE" (some irony here), run IIS on WinXP (not NT2000) and SQL database.
I have no special skills in cracking, but anyone who works with web stuff & servers knows about _vti_XXX holes. Take a look around using _vti_cnf. All holes are still there, look for yourself. There admin SUCKS!!!! I used an attack against the SQL database. Kept a few screen shots for the way to easy to crack album.
PS: It's kind of sad that they are using US products hosted in FRANCE. Yet they dog the US and our capitalism (No bigger capitalist then Bill Gates & Microsoft) !
r0ach74
If they think that the current operations in Iraq will diminsh the threat from terrorism and make the world safer for the US, they must be smoking something really really bad...
They know that. It's actually part of the plan. They need to keep poking the hornet's nest to make sure there are plenty of "evildoers" out there who "hate freedom" and want to do us harm. Then they can sell us their extreme foreign and domestic policy agenda that wouldn't fly in a peace-time U.S.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
http://hosting.coldfirestudios.com/slashdot/aljaz
Screen shot: http://hosting.coldfirestudios.com/slashdot/aljaz
Sorry, I couldn't grab the flash portion of the site, but I was still able to grab all of this
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
They got "Al-Jazeera'd".
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
So what this statement amounts to is, "if I decide that I don't like you, fear my wrath!" This sounds like an extremely unreasonable message to be broadcasting to the rest of the world, and I think the world has reacted to it as such.
oderint dum metuant: Let them hate so long as they fear. (A favorite saying of Caligula.)
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
The english domain name for Aljazeera have now been redirected to someone else.
Goto either http://english.aljazeera.net or http://www.aljazeera.net and you will get "Under Construction" pages. The english page says "This Page has Been Taken Over By Saimoon Bhuiyan".
As I write this, someone put up a "Let Freedom Ring...", saying they are a patriot. It disguists me when someone tries and say they support freedom, when they squelch someone else's freedom of speech.
Al-Jazeera may show dead Iraqi children killed by "allied" explosion, but where are the articles and the stories about repression in Iraq under Saddam. Where are the storiesof political repression and torture. Simply they are none-existant.
Contrary to what another slashdoter said 3 lies != truth.
What are the chances that the crackers involved in this assault on the DNS servers see prosecution or jail time?
I have a feeling that the government is going to look the other way, if they aren't involved in some way. (who knows?)
There are a lot of persons in the USA that think this is a great thing, even though the constitution of the country they love was explicitly created to prevent the squelching of ideas of the minority.
Oh, don't worry about it, ainsoph, it's getting to me too, I was up all night last night and I just can't seem to stop arguing about this. I had to be gently rebuked in much the same manner for the divisive nature of my last journal entry, and I have to agree that it was a bit overzealous. Tension is running high, and people probably deserve some slack. Don't worry about it.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
here is a link to a post that has screenshot of defaced site. or a direct link here and mirror here.
also noticed that they changes there DNS to dotster to stop incoming traffic.
pretzel_logic
Simply, easy and real
So what you are saying is that you are biased,
just as much as the media. You are putting a
slant or "spin" on everything, just as the media
has. There is a saying, something about a kettle
and the color black. Why haven't they sent any
planes into the air? Explain that one to me. They
know that they will die, we are better in the air,
the sea. Have you ever been to death valley? The
marines and army have. One big pile of sand is the
same as the next.
You've shown your stripes. Children killed in the war is not your real concern. You're just anti-Bush.
I never said I was an American, though I was willing to let you assume I am from my grasp of English. I wanted you to listen to what I had to say.
And what exactly are the rest of us in the world supposed to do, other than complain? Many entire countries have raised their voices against this war, only to be totally ignored and subsequently lambasted in the American press. The US has made it clear that it will tolerate no international opposition, that the governments of other nations are supposed to go along with its policies regardless of the opinions of their populations (and many of the "Coalition" nations' populations are overwhelmingly opposed to the war, for instance Italy and Spain). If my elected officials are unable to oppose the US for fear of retaliation, and the US will not listen to the leaders of the great nations with the courage to oppose them, what exactly, in your opinion, are we supposed to do, other than complain?
So I am doing the only thing I can do, which is trying to talk you out of it. And many others are trying with me. But it is clear that we will fail, and that you will continue your policy of rampant agression which has caused the US to be widely percieved as the greatest threat to peace and security in the world. What are we supposed to do? You have told us, in no uncertain terms, that we are to submit to you or face severe consequences. The people where I live are almost universally opposed to this war, but they say, "what can we do, the US is the Superpower of the World, how can we oppose them"?
The people of the world have called upon you, in no uncertain terms, to turn away from this path of unchecked violence, agression, and rule by force. You have laughed in their face, and threatened them with destruction if they dare to oppose your will. What then are we to do? Die? Lie down and submit? Clearly, you expect many of us to do these things.
Please, I call upon you, in the name of conscience and humanity, turn away from the path of killing and destruction and force. It is not the answer. It will not make the world a better place. You are really scaring people, and this is not a good thing. We do not know what to do. We are frightened. We do not want this war, we do not want to be dominated by a superpower with no accountability or restraint, we do not want to lie down and submit and die, but you seem to be offering us no choice.
What do you expect us to do?
My site: Free Nature Pictures
Do you really think that Caligula is a good model to be following?
If they hate and fear, will they not strike back, in any way they can, whenever they get the chance? This sounds like a poor excuse for a policy to me.
My site: Free Nature Pictures
No I am morally lambasting the US for supporting Saddam in the first place. For a country that purports to spread the concept of democracy and freedom to the world, the US supports a hell of a lot of thugs and tyrants.
Whenever I hear a US leader talking about "bringing freedom" to a people, I imediately start looking for the money angle.
And just on the USA bashing lets get this straight, I support the America that represents Freedom of Speech, the concept of true democracy and equality for all under the law. I do not support the America that will without any hesitation dis-enfranchise voters based on race, treat the world as its playground and support murderers and despots just so American companies can get access to cheap natural resources.
A DEMOCRACY is where the people who live there get to choose who represents them in the governing body. It doesn't mean that people have the final say in what goes on. It doesn't mean that people get to stop proceedings started by their government. It DEFINITELY doesn't mean that the people are immune to getting their ass kicked for disagreeing with the government. And it shouldn't.
One day there's going to be some big peace march, and then there will be a firing squad who'll butcher like 500 dumb-ass protestors (Most of whom publicly protest anything from chlorine in the water to starving little afghani shitheads not getting their daily pedialite). Then I'll laugh, I'll laugh so long and hard I'll cry. And as the laugher rolls, and the tears of mirth stream down my face, I'll think "Where's your DEMOCRACY now bitch! Muha! Guess you should protest some more!"
Protestors piss me off.
Death to Reefer Addicts.
--
The Al-Jazeera website now point to the IP address of :
127.0.0.1
And for those of you that may not know what that IP points to, look at the PC that you are reading this post with!!
Now that is funny
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
Just because that's true doesn't mean Bush isn't using it as an excuse to establish a very dangerous world where many more people will be at risk.
You're just anti-Bush
Well, it's hard to be pro-Bush when he's such a useless, lying toerag.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
As of 23:05 UTC 27 Mar 2003, the site was displaying the default Debian/Apache placeholder.
At least something in the Arab world is free.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
I don't know who all is actually keeping score here, but al-Jazeera isn't a major media organization. They probably don't have the money to host a site to serve a million Americans a day. They have ~30 employees, and they don't have a very large subscriber base (not many rich Arabs in the world who can afford satellite, and fewer still w/out national censors.) The mystique is almost entirely the way American media watches al-Jazeera as a benchmark of the Arab Street, since all the other media orgs in the region are basically state propaganda machines.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
If you honestly think that America wants thousands of its own troops to die in a chemical attack in order to BOLSTER public opinion of our stance on the war you are seriously misguided. Remove the tinfoil hat please.
I can understand some people have fears of "colonialism", but it is simply not the way the US works.
hahahahahahahaha.. Surely you jest! Right? You are kidding eh?
Two Questions:
Can you prove it?
Have you travelled much outside of the USA?
It is universally recognized that with any right comes responsability. Inciting riots and cultural hatred on the scale of entire nations and ethnicities is equivalent to screaming fire in a crowded building.
In the end either Al-Jazeera is going to learn to report in a responsible manner or they'll berelegated to reporting only local Quatari news.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
It is universally recognized that with any right comes responsability. Inciting riots and cultural hatred on the scale of entire nations and ethnicities is equivalent to screaming fire in a crowded building.
In the end either Al-Jazeera is going to learn to report in a responsible manner or they'll berelegated to reporting only local Quatari news.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
After watching some Al Jazeera footage of United States prisoners of war and young guys shot in their foreheads I wonder why that site is still up. How long will it take for us to launch a missle attack at their station?
http://www.shockingelk.com/pictures/liberated_iraq is/
Wow, impressive. We need English translations. ;)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Has anyone volunteered to help Al-Jazeera get its online, English news coverage, stable? Wether by volunteering skills or resources? I've noticed english.aljazeera.net is all in Arabic now, and still using IIS...
I would be willing to volunteer some skills and resources. Why would I volunteer to help Al-Jazeera?
1) I support free speech, even if I don't agree with what's being said.
2) I can't even READ what the biased opinion of Al-Jazeera is because the site is in Arabic, overloaded, DoS'd, or cracked, and I don't have a satellite dish.
3) All news services are biased in one manner or another. I can make up my own mind about what I read and hear, but I still need to see what is being reported.
Perhaps Al-Jazeera wouldn't even trust anyone to help them with all the problems they seem to be having. I like some of the previously posted ideas of using P2P, like Gnutella, to distrubute the load more. I'm sure a whole host of things could be contributed by volunteers to get their English coverage up again.
-- Creativity knows no medium
A quote from someone in their IT dept:
Amid the battle for hearts and minds in the most information-controlled war in history, one measure of the importance of those American PoW pictures and the images of the dead British soldiers is surely the sustained "shock and awe" hacking campaign directed at aljazeera.net since the start of the war. As I write, the al-Jazeera website has been down for three days and few here doubt that the provenance of the attack is the Pentagon. Meanwhile, our hosting company, the US-based DataPipe, has terminated our contract after lobbying by other clients whose websites have been brought down by the hacking.
The old print media reports that somebody in the US did some social engineering and called Network Solutions and got the aljazeerah.net domain rerouted to the previously-mentioned Networld site, which got waxed. FBI is investigating. Chaos in-between plus publicity probably led to being slashdotted, and the script kiddies joined in for phun.
a) Al Jazeerah - stop whining. You can dish it out, but can you take it?
b) What is with Network Solutions? Haven't they been embarrassed enough by this kind of stuff before?
c) All you emotionally drunk self-promoted pundits - we're talking about the hack/DDoS/reroute job here. Take your flamebait to another topic.
d) Al Jazeerah again - If you want to be the definitiave source of middle eastern and Arab news, you had best be prepared to handle the load, and know how to do it.
e) eLemmings - ph34r the h0rd3. Seriously, bring it up a notch above eGraffiti.
Looks like they are back up. Still no english news coverage, but presumably that's only a normal matter of triage priorities.
They will not be crucified by anyone, except maybe from a few people from the arab world.
I'm an American and I can tell you the average American would indeed be pissed if we grabbed any of the oil or failed to transition to a local government. We already have a signifigant minority opposed to the war. That would quickly become a vast majority of the population if things were to go as you suggest.
It is simply impossible for the US government to act contrary to majority public oppinion for long. One third of congress comes up for re-election every two years. Congress can quickly shut down anything president tries to do.
It seems most critisism of the US actions are based on the assumption that the US is lying about what it is going to do. I don't know what country you live in, but in the US there are signifigant limits on what lies the government can get away with. The democratic and republican parties have signifigant influence over candidates, but a portion of those elected are random "ordinary people". They can and will get extensive news coverage if the government tries to get away with anying.
They need to have access to the oil
Then kindly explain the logic of the DECADE of sanctions that pretty much shut down access to Iraqi oil?
If the US "grabbed" the oil that would be bad, but I am saying that will not happen. Of course we aren't going to prevent them from selling it either. Most countries want to sell their oil. That is not "exploitation", that is commerce. They profit and benefit from it.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
LOL, good one. And thanx for the correction about Alaska and Hawaii. Ummm, assuming you're right. I have no idea what dates they entered the union.
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Two Questions:
Can you prove it?
Well, this post of mine explains some of the limitations on what the US government can "get away with". But the issue is wheather or not the US government is lying about what it is going to do. If anything the "burden of proof" should mainly be on the peroson claiming the US is lying.
It is pretty twisted logic to blame the US based on unfounded predictions that the US is going to do something it has specificly stated it will not do. If US government were to break these commitments it would be blatant and the US would be subject to massive condemnation both internally and internationally. If you have any evidence the US plans to break these commitments then I am honestly interested in hearing it.
Just because the US could seize the oil does not mean it will. I'm saying it will not happen, and that if it did then the US public would "overthrow" the government at the next election. That is the great thing about the system - (A) we can peacfully overthrow anyone who "missbehaves" and (B) the government has a hard time hiding anything from the pubic. "Ordinary people" get elected to congress and they'd blow the whistle to the media.
Have you travelled much outside of the USA?
Some, not a lot. Five other countries, but not extensively.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Do you really think that Caligula is a good model to be following?
Nope. Just pointing out the policy that our shadow government (The Project for the New American Century) is pursuing. Calling a spade a spade as it were and also pointing out that we, as a species, have been at this point before. It's kind of ironic, as well, that the last remnant of the Roman Empire (The Roman Catholic Church) is speaking out against our recklessness. Their institutional memory gives them a little better perspective on the exercise of power, I guess.
So, as South Park Saddam would say, "Relax, big fella." No Roman Emperor will ever be a role model for me (wish I could say the same for our so-called leaders).
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
Then kindly explain the logic of the DECADE of sanctions that pretty much shut down access to Iraqi oil?
Hussein was needed. He scared the Saudis and others in the region enough to buy arms worth several billions every months. From the US.
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
Sorry for the delay repling, I was away for the weekend.
Hussein was needed. He scared the Saudis and others in the region enough to buy arms worth several billions every months. From the US.
(1) I asked you to "explain the logic of the DECADE of sanctions that pretty much shut down access to Iraqi oil". Maybe I'm dense, but I see no connection between your "answer" and my question. Even if I accepted your theory about the weapons sales scheme, it still conficts with your claim that "They need to have access to the oil".
(2) It sounds like a really really bad movie plot. You descibe an insanely overcomplex and uncontrollable scheme to indirectly drive up profits in other countries while losing money on the Iraq embargo. You are assuming some evil conspiracy that has a ludacris level of control over international events.
(3) The US sends billions in aid to the region. That would make absolutely no sense if you were right about "oil profits" or "weapon profits" or neocolonialism. It's a "pure loss" factor on any profit motive.
(4) The US is spending many billions on the war. It far exceeds any conceivable profits from anything.
(5) The "evil oil profit people" and "evil weapon profit people" would have opposed each other every step of the way through out the whole mess.
(6) Both the Iraqi embargo and the war would have been opposed by virtually every other "profit sector" in the US economy. For example the transportation sector suffered from the embargo (higher fuel prices), and the are suffering from the war (higher fuel prices AND 20% drop in travel).
(7) "Ordinary people" get elected to the US congress. You simply can't have that kind of secret control. Someone would leak it to the press.
(8) Elected officials have to reveal what companies they have links to. It would be blatantly obvious if several hundred of them all had a financial intrest in either oil companies or in weapons companies. American press loves reporting on conflicts of intrest like that. Most officials get rid of their stocks in order to avoid exactly those news stories.
I'm curious, what country do you live in?
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
that is what governments say all the time isn't it? i.e. you need the state. repeat after me: you need the state.
You may not "need the state", but you do need a state. Government provides several useful functions. When you have any signifigant number of people I would say some sort of government is needed.
On the other hand I firmly believe in limitations on government.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.