Slashdot Mirror


Hackers Take Aim at Republicans

An anonymous reader writes "Wired reports-- Online protests targeting GOP websites could turn out to be more than symbolic during this month's Republican National Convention, possibly blocking a critical communications tool for the party... "We want to bombard (the Republican sites) with so much traffic that nobody can get in," said CrimethInc, a member of the so-called Black Hat Hackers Bloc. It's one of several groups planning to distribute software tools to reload Republican sites over and over again."

14 of 1,866 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not unexpected by Otter · · Score: 4, Informative
    I'd better hear the same hue and cry in here as if a group of right-wing extremists were gleefully planning to shut down the DNC, or Nader, or any other such group.

    You remember all the fuss last month when the Oregon Democrats flooded a Nader meeting in a limited-capacity hall with the explicit purpose of denying him ballot petition signatures, right? No? The New York Times managed to overlook it as well, although just a couple of days ago they managed to squeeze in one more story about imaginary roadblocks in Florida in 2000.

  2. Re:Take off your... by beh · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm sorry - I happen to be German, and I followed the German news in the run-up to war.

    The BND (the German CIA counterpart) stated they don't have evidence supporting this - they didn't have proof of non-existense of the alleged weapons either - but that's beside the point. Based on exactly THOSE issues, Germany did take its anti-war stance. There were (almost) no protests against the Afghan war, since people were convinced that the Taliban were in cahoots with Al Qaeda, but in the Iraq case, I have yet to meet a single compatriot that thought this war was justified...

    Hint: Just because the republican Iraq war examination white-wash said "the Germans also said Iraq HAD WMD" doesn't neccessarily make it so.
    The Germans happened to say, we ca NOT prove Saddam has NO weapons. But that's about the extend of it.

    Germans don't like terror either - and there are people worried Germany might become a target for Al Qaeda terror cells as well. And as such, Germany would certainly support a war against any country openly supporting terrorism (or at least, a country that is proven to be supporting terrorism); but that doesn't mean to blindly follow Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld.

  3. Re:This is being done by Republican-SUPPORTERS, ri by beh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Two things here:

    a) a page reloading script certainly shouldn't all that a hacker is capable of - but since they want people to voluntarily take part in this, they can't resort to illegal things. And page reloading can hardly be deemed illegal.

    b) If you DO want to personally criticise someone (and I think "You yourself are an idiot" easily qualifies for that), then at least don't hide behind an "Anonymous Coward" mask.

  4. Re:Stupid, Stupid, Stupid by kalidasa · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read this.

    Phil Singer, a spokesman for Kerry, said Thursday that Cheney was being disingenuous and was twisting Kerry's words. Singer noted that President Bush had also used the word "sensitive."

    "Dick Cheney's desperate misleading attacks now have him criticizing George Bush's own words, who called for America to be 'sensitive about expressing our power and influence,'" Singer said.

  5. Re:This is being done by Republican-SUPPORTERS, ri by acebone · · Score: 3, Informative

    They didn't cave. They threw out a Gvt. that lied to them. The new Gvt. was against the war from the outset.

    --
    Check out my PHP Url Validator
  6. Re:Take off your... by Phleg · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sarin is a gas. But let's ignore that, and suppose that it's a liquid and can be easily transported in drums.

    Actually, Sarin is a liquid that vaporizes at room temperature. So it is a liquid, and CAN be easily transported in drums.

    --
    No comment.
  7. Re:What goes around, comes around. by javiercero · · Score: 4, Informative

    "On the one hand, we have Bush; a guy who (most of the time) has a clear agenda, strong beliefs, and tends to stick to them (whether we like them or not). The end result is that he may do some things that we don't like, simply because he believes in them."

    Well, Hitler too did things because he had "clear" beliefs... and he stuck to them. So what is your point? He is not the president to stick to his beliefs, but to work for the American people.
    According to you then, a lemming would be the ideal democratic leader, right? I have newsflash for you a democracy means that there are many different beliefs, a president has to be able to accomodate most of them, w/o having to impose his own. You want a dictator, not a president...

    And please don't come up with the whole "moral clarity vs. flip/flopping" crap, not like Dubya has ever flip/flopped, no siree bob:

    1. Social Security Surplus

    BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01] ...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02]

    2. Patient's Right to Sue

    GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [Salon, 2/7/01] ...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00] ...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE "To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits 'would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04]

    3. Tobacco Buyout

    BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... "They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed." [President Bush, 5/04] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS "The administration is open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04]

    4. North Korea

    BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... "We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [President's Statement, 11/15/02] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM"Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles

  8. Re:This is being done by Republican-SUPPORTERS, ri by Aardpig · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the WFB:
    Argentina purchasing power parity - $432.7 billion (2003 est.), external debt $142 billion (2002 est.)
    USA purchasing power parity - $10.98 trillion (2003 est.), external debt $1.4 trillion (2001 est.)

    I agree with all your figures apart from the USA external debt (the national debt value quoted in the WFB is for 1995 -- where did your value of $1.4 trillion come from?). Consider the following report:

    US external debt up to $6.494 tln at end of Sept

    U.S. debt owed to foreigners totaled $6.494 trillion at the end of September, up 2.2 percent over the $6.357 trillion in external debt seen at the end of June, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday. In its quarterly Web posting of the U.S. external debt position, the Treasury said a large portion, about $1.374 trillion in principal and $51.52 billion in interests payments, were due in the next three months. The data cover government and private bank debt owed to foreign investors, governments, banks and monetary authorities. Treasury first published the data in October in an effort to comply with the International Monetary Fund's Special Data Dissemination System guidelines for economic data.

    Source: Reuters Wed December 31, 2003

    That paints a rather different picture, doesn't it? Based on these figures, the USA appears to be more overextended than Argentina, not less.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  9. that link is irrelevant by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

    That links shows how much they've raised in campaign donations. It is indeed true that Bush has raised more in campaign donations. What the previous poster was saying, however, is that Kerry's personal wealth is much greater than Bush's personal wealth.

    Some ballpark figures for assets, drawn partly from here:
    Kerry (incl. wife): $500 to $600 million
    Cheney: $17 to $85 million
    Edwards: ~$19 million
    Bush: $6 to $14 million

    So as you can see, even if those numbers are off by a lot, Kerry is still the richest by far, and Bush is the poorest of the four.

  10. Re:This is being done by Republican-SUPPORTERS, ri by timjdot · · Score: 3, Informative

    On Topic, programmers are getting beat to death like the auto workers and steel workers in the 80's. By dimantling the middle class one industry sector at a time, the rest of the middle class ignores it. Unfo. for the elitists there's a snapback effect once a critical mass is reached. Perhaps they think by extending the process over 50 years the effect will not occur? I theorized while studying Western Cic. in HS that about 18% of the people have to get really pissed and then they start protests and then the snapback snowballs. When you see people actively attacking the elitist governemnt, then you are seeing that people are pissed.
    National Debt (well, basically embezzlement by the politicians and their cronies) is just one reason. Take a look at the last page of this link and see pure embezzlement from our government: embezzlement?. Who's stupid enough to vote for an incumbant? Bush and Kerry are both incumbants. They should both tear their clothes, gnash their teeth, and ask the American people to pray for a better government. They don't.
    I was looking at the debt before and got some numbers from various US gov. web sites. Amazingly the dis-information campaign has not shut these down. Funny thing is that it has increased ever since like 1962 but Democrats claim Clinton had a Balanced Budget. This FALSE accounting is nonsense. Ask a kid in school if spending more than you take in is a Balanced Budget. That said, the administration prior to this one did do alot better. The USA cannot afford another Republican government if you believe that relates to the debt trendline. We will be bankrupted and forced into servitude to a world government/bank. "Don't cry for me Argentina...." :-)
    First look at the situation for UK and Canada. UK
    Canada
    These can be graphed in Excel... I did not find a good site with the chart on the web.
    ,Budget Surplus or Deficit (-) as % GDP,Cyclical Surplus or Deficit (-) as % GDP,Other Adjustments as % GDP,Surplus or Deficit (-) as % GDP,Revenues as % GDP,Outlays as % GDP,Debt (100B),Debt as % of GDP,Debt as % of Tax Income (x100),GDP (100T),Debt,Tax Income (100B),Tax Income (B),Tax Income as % of GDP (x100) 1962,-1.2,-0.4,0.1,-0.7,17.3,18,,,,,,0.5,46.5, 1963,-0.8,-0.3,-0.1,-0.6,17.5,18.1,,,,,,0.5,49.1, 1964,-0.9,0.3,0.2,-1,17,18,,,,,,0.5,46, 1965,-0.2,0.8,0.2,-0.8,16.2,17,,,,,,0.5,51.1, 1966,-0.5,1.9,0.4,-2.1,15.9,18,,,,,,0.6,58.6, 1967,-1.1,1.7,*,-2.8,16.9,19.7,,,,,,0.6,64.4, 1968,-3,1.4,0.6,-3.7,16.5,20.3,4,,4.7%,, $358.00 ,0.8,76.4, 1969,0.4,1.6,*,-1.2,17.7,18.9,4,,4.0%,, $368.00 ,0.9,91.7, 1970,-0.3,0.6,0.2,-0.6,17.8,18.4,4,,4.4%,, $389.00 ,0.9,88.9, 1971,-2.1,-0.3,0.9,-0.9,17.1,18.1,4,,4.9%,, $424.00 ,0.9,85.8, 1972,-2,*,0.3,-1.7,16.9,18.6,4,,4.2%,, $429.00 ,1.0,102.8, 1973,-1.2,1.2,0.6,-1.7,16.7,18.4,5,,4.3%,, $469.00 ,1.1,109.6, 1974,-0.4,0.7,1.3,0.1,17.7,17.6,5,0.3%,3.9%,1.5, $492.00 ,1.3,126.5,8.4% 1975,-3.3,-1.4,2,0.1,18.5,18.4,6,0.4%,4.8%,1.6, $576.00 ,1.2,120.7,7.5% 1976,-4.1,-1.4,0.8,-2,17.3,19.3,7,0.4%,4.6%,1.8, $653.00 ,1.4,141.2,7.8% 1977,-2.7,-0.6,1,-1.1,17.8,18.9,7,0.4%,4.4%,2, $718.00 ,1.6,162.2,8.1% 1978,-2.7,0.1,1.3,-1.5,17.5,19.1,8,0.3%,4.2%,2.3, $789.00 ,1.9,188.9,8.2% 1979,-1.6,0.5,1.4,-0.7,17.9,18.6,8,0.3%,3.8%,2.6, $845.00 ,2.2,224.6,8.6% 1980,-2.7,-0.7,1.6,-0.4,18.8,19.2,9,0.3%,3.7%,2.8, $930.00 ,2.5,250,8.9% 1981,-2.5,-0.9,1.2,-0.4,19.5,19.9,10,0.3%,3.5%,3.1 ," $1,028.00 ",2.9,290.6,9.4% 1982,-3.7,-2,0.7,-1.1,19.2,20.3,12,0.4%,4.1%,3.3," $1,197.00 "

    --
    Expect Freedom.
  11. Re:Myth by markt4 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know. Don't feed the trolls. But... Your Rush Limbaugh promoted research is mistaken.

    According to this August 7th article from Bloomberg (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/business/ar ticle/0,1299,DRMN_4_3094590,00.html) many more billionaires support Bush than do Kerry - 116 to 31. The billionaires for Bush include Bill Gates (who did not give to Kerry), 280 CEOs of Russell 1000 companies (Kerry got money from 52), and most Hollywood studio executives.

    Until Enron's collapse, Ken Lay - Enron's CEO - was George W. Bush's top benefactor. As to small donors vs. large see this (http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/donordems .asp?filter=A&sortby=2).

    Bernie Ebbers Worldcom's disgraced former CEO was a huge Republican fund raiser, and Trent Lott's biggest benefactor.

    The Saudi's (including the Bin Laden family) did sweethart deals for George W. Bush, bailing out two of his failed companies, and making him rich while the rest of the shareholders were left holding the bag.

    Bush, by far - 57,218 to 26,911, outpaces Kerry in the $2,000+ donors category, and Kerry, again by a large margin - 35% of Kerry's donors compared to 28% of Bush's, outpaces Bush in the $200 or less category.

    Please do check the facts yourself, and here's a hint: you won't find them on Rush Limbaugh's web site.

  12. Same guy from DefCon by g0bshiTe · · Score: 4, Informative

    If I'm not mistaken /. ran a previous story about him getting tossed from DefCon. http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/0 8/03/1617215&tid=156&tid=172&tid=95&tid=21 8
    The report from newsforge is under Hacktivism.
    http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/08/02/1 426209
    I swear this sounds like a guy whose site I used to work on. I saw someone had posted a code snippet from their supposed DoS tool. The code looks like their caliber, shoddy. They are nothing more than an army of spotty faced kids who grew up in suburban areas, and are pissed because mommy and daddy didn't buy them a pony for their 5th birthday.

    If I do find it is the same guy, I will post the URL to the Slashdot community, and you guys can sound off on their forums about what you think of their politics.

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  13. Re:Chicago 1968 and Seattle 1999 again.... by divisionbyzero · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have you ever heard of proportionate response? You know, it's when people who have weapons don't use those weapons against people who don't have them, not to mention body armor and the National Guard to back them up, or if they do use them, they use them only against those causing problems, not indiscriminately against everyone.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_Nat io nal_Convention

    Notice the Walker Report calls it a "police riot", not a student riot or anything else.

    Seattle was a little different, as there was intent by a minority of the people there to cause some serious harm to property and persons, but once again lack of police discipline in exercising a proportionate response, inluding beating innocent bystanders, result in unecessary physical harm to protestors. There isn't much hope for law and order when your own police are disordered.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTO_Meeting_of_1999

    Similar stuff happend in Miami for FTAA. The DNC was quiet because the police, due to a tip-off, managed to seize all of the urine, blood, faeces, etc. that the anarchists were going to use. I'm not sure how many anarchists were seized as well and held until the DNC was over, but I imagine there were quite a few.

    The sad part is that it probably doesn't matter to you what the facts are. You like this current Republican administration only use apparent facts to support whatever your current agenda is and if those facts change, you just find or make up new ones to support your position without even considering changing your position. That is the definition of an idealogue, in other words someone who irrational believes in something, exactly what folks like you call, and rightfully so, the anarchists. So maybe you and the anarchists have more in common than you thought?

  14. Re:better for whom by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Informative
    One thing to be aware of is that cut and pasting Republican trolls without doing the barest minimum of research to check them can make you look like an idiot.

    I hold no brief for Kerry, he's not my kind of politician, he doesn't appear to share my values, and he hasn't been tough enough against the current administration. But I'm absolutely amazed at the level of lies and distortions the right is willing to entertain to try to discredit him.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.