Slashdot Mirror


Indymedia Servers Given Back

NW writes "According to a post on Indymedia Argentina the two Indymedia servers seized earlier by the FBI are in the process of being returned: "A Rackspace employee stated, "I was just told that the court order is being complied with and your servers in London will be online at 5pm GMT. I will pass along anymore information that becomes available and that I am allowed to." It has been verified that the returned hard-drives are the originals, but the circumstances of the seizure still remain unclear: who took them, why were they taken, and under which court order? Indymedia is not aware as to whether Rackspace is still under gag order. The hard-drives will be treated as "hacked" (compromised) and as a result there will be delays in restoring the sites that are still down."" Here's our previous coverage on this.

427 comments

  1. So... by Luigi30 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does anyone know why the hell they seized them in the first place?

    --
    503 Sig Unavailable

    The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
    1. Re:So... by binarybum · · Score: 1

      RTFSummary,

      but the circumstances of the seizure still remain unclear: who took them, why were they taken, and under which court order?

      --
      ôó
    2. Re:So... by bofkentucky · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No sure answers, and frankly, Indymedia (and/or Rackspace) may never know. Search and Siezure laws in some parts of Europe are vastly different than in the US, ranging from no protection from government search to 4th ammendment style protections, it varies country by country. IIRC the EU "constitution" has a non-binding 4th ammendment clause.

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
    3. Re:So... by skitzoid+(moomoo) · · Score: 0

      Bavarian Illuminati. This isn't the first time Independant Media related pages have been swiped of the net for no reason.

    4. Re:So... by Piquan · · Score: 1

      IRC the EU "constitution" has a non-binding 4th ammendment clause.

      So does the US.

    5. Re:So... by jd · · Score: 1

      It was... it was... the long-lost twin of Radio Caroline... Zippy! Yes, Zippy - with the aid of Bungle and George - managed to blackmail the Swiss government into blackmailing the FBI into blackmailing the British Government into storming in through the Round Window, past Fingermouse and Dangermouse, into the Server room, where they took the disks in the mistaken belief tha they were small microwavable pizzas.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Indymedia freaks are saying it's the Jooos...

    7. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT DOWN!

      You didn't even have to read the article : the synopsis says "but the circumstances of the seizure still remain unclear: who took them, why were they taken, and under which court order?"

      Yet, you get modded to a 5 ??

      WTF?

    8. Re:So... by EDSdrone · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this will provide some answers: "Richard Allan, Liberal Democrat MP for Sheffield, Hallam, has tabled a Parliamentary question to the Home Office asking David Blunkett "what recent discussions he has had with US law enforcement agencies concerning the seizure of material from UK-based internet hosting providers; and if he will make a statement." This is to be dealt with later today. MPs in the National Union of Journalists' Parliamentary Group are also tabling questions." From www.theregister.co.uk

    9. Re:So... by prell · · Score: 1
      From their site (emphasis mine):

      An FBI spokesperson, Joe Parris, confirmed to Agence France-Presse that the FBI issued a subpoena to the provider who hosted the Indymedia servers in the U.K., but that it was "on behalf of a third country." (1) Daniel Zapelli, senior federal prosecutor for Geneva (Switzerland), confirmed that he has opened a criminal investigation into Indymedia coverage of the 2003 G8 Summit in Evian. (2) Zapelli will provide details of that investigation at a press conference on Tuesday. Federal prosecutor of Bologna (Italy) Marina Plazzi stated that she is investigating Italy Indymedia because it may "support terrorism." (3) Plazzi says she will provide more information on Thursday, October 14th.
    10. Re:So... by sepluv · · Score: 1
      Because these guys didn't like the photos of them on there apparently.

      They could've just emailed in a nicer photo of themselves and I'm sure IM would have put it up for them--bringing in the FBI was a bit much.

      (Personally I don't think the world's best photographers could make their ugly mugs look any better than that.)

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  2. Hardware too... by SJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would be treating the entire computer as hacked... not just the hard drive.

    Who knows what kind of traffic / key loggers have been installed.

    (And yes, I realize that a hardware key logger is next to useless on a headless server.)

    1. Re:Hardware too... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Who knows what kind of traffic / key loggers have been installed.

      I think you're being a little paranoid. Why the hell would the FBI care about Indymedia's servers? From the last article they're just complying with a European country through international agreements. The FBI couldn't care less about Indymedia itself.

    2. Re:Hardware too... by suwain_2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I may well have misunderstood, but it sounded to me as if only the hard drives were seized.

      True, various logger stuff could have been installed. (Although that would be on the harddrive, if in software.) But that's a risk you run whenever you have a dedicated server, or even if you colocate your gear where someone else has physical access.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    3. Re:Hardware too... by synthparadox · · Score: 0

      What I don't get is why the FBI/EU would want to take down the Indymedia servers in the first place.

      How much you wanna bet they'll claim its on basis of reasonable evidence of access by Al Qaeda or something like that?

    4. Re:Hardware too... by http · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're on crack if you think the FBI isn't interested in IndyMedia. To quote Mr. Heron, "You got freedom of speech - as long as you don't say too much." IndyMedia participants say a lot.

      --
      If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
      3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
    5. Re:Hardware too... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      I would be treating the entire computer as hacked... not just the hard drive.

      They should probably have been doing this anyway. I don't see any reason to store sensitive data on an indymedia server. Sure you watch traffic, but the assumption should be that the government can do this already anyway (does indymedia have any https servers?).

    6. Re:Hardware too... by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      More importantly, its likely the gov't has made copies of the entire disk. Any passwords, private keys or other sensative information that would be harmful if known is now comprimised. Even if the disk is verified somehow to be unscathed, it still bears this burden. It would then be a trivial matter for law enforcement to snoop on secure data streams, which I hear the UK is big on.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    7. Re:Hardware too... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      What major stories has indymedia broken?

    8. Re:Hardware too... by sg_oneill · · Score: 2, Informative

      What major stories has indymedia broken?

      Diebold election scamming is the main one that comes to mind. Theres been a heck of a lot of anti protestor violence reported (and in some cases acted on by authorities) ie in Genoa. Indy does tend to focus on local news alot, so its in the local area indy sites that you'll find most of the scoops.

      Indy does alot of work in countries with strong political repression. Iran, Iraq, Burma, etc.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    9. Re:Hardware too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Diebold election scamming
      Not broken by Indymedia
      > anti protestor violence
      Indymedia reports brutal facist pig oppression for nearly every protest whether or not anything actually happened. Conclusion: nobody cares.

    10. Re:Hardware too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The few serious posts made there are drowned by the insane lunatics who usually post there.

      No no no, obviously the "insane lunatics" are FBI agents trying to discredit indymedia, drowning out the true voice of the oppressed!!!

    11. Re:Hardware too... by Yeb · · Score: 5, Informative
      DAldredge asked:
      What major stories has indymedia broken?

      1. Go to any demonstration or social forum

      2. Listen to what the folks there have to say

      3. Read the corporate coverage of it. Check the national news, likely there will be nothing. Read your "local" (e.g. Gannett owned) newspaper and see what they say. Listen to the "local" TV (e.g. one of a few companies) coverage, if any. Listen to the "local" (e.g. Clear Channel) radio coverage, if any.

      4. Go to your local Indymedia and see the coverage of the issues and what really happened at the demo.

      5. Compare what you saw at the demo/social forum with what's in the corporate press.

      This is one example, but is probably where Indymedia shows the most glaring difference between what really is happening and what you're supposed to hear.

      On July 20th, 2001 Carlos Guiliani was shot and killed by Italian police forces during the G8 summit demonstrations in Genoa, Italy. I've always been into the news & politics so I was reading it on fucking cnn.com and they were saying "uh, some guy was shot, we dunno what happened". I mentioned it to a friend and he said, "dude, go to indymedia". Indymedia, of course, had like a dozen photos of exactly what happened. Had it not been for indymedia, the story probably would have disappeared.

      At that time, I had never heard of the massive demonstrations that happened in Seattle in 1999. I had been reading the corporate press. How would I know? How would I know the issues that they were raising? If I kept reading the corporate news, I'd still be clueless as to what's going on in other parts of the word. The corporate press in other nations have their own $agenda too.

      Indymedia certainly has it's share of junk, but I notice you're still reading slashdot. ;)

      -Jeff

    12. Re:Hardware too... by mpe · · Score: 1

      Indymedia certainly has it's share of junk, but I notice you're still reading slashdot. ;)

      The "mainstream media" also has its share of "junk". At times including fiction passed off as reporting.

    13. Re:Hardware too... by jadel · · Score: 1
      On July 20th, 2001 Carlos Guiliani was shot and killed by Italian police forces during the G8 summit demonstrations in Genoa, Italy.
      Is this the one who was about to throw a fire extinguisher at a jeep full of policemen three feet away?
    14. Re:Hardware too... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      Ah good, a just punishment for his attempted crime then? Its good to know the system works and that he certainly won't be doing that again.

    15. Re:Hardware too... by SQL+Error · · Score: 1

      Death by stupidity. Hardly anything new.

    16. Re:Hardware too... by VDM · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, in fact: but the fire estinguisher was just thrown out by a policeman towards the guy. It was part of the internal tools of the jeep.

    17. Re:Hardware too... by Yeb · · Score: 1

      and where did you see that photo? That's the point I'm making.

    18. Re:Hardware too... by CGP314 · · Score: 1

      What major stories has indymedia broken?

      Well, they may not break stories, but they do give accurate on-the-ground coverage of events. Back in November I participated in the London protests against George Bush's State visit. All the major media painted a pretty distorted picture of what happened whereas Indymedia did a good job. I had always known about media distortion, but it's a different thing when you experience it first hand.

    19. Re:Hardware too... by kaldari · · Score: 1

      San Francisco Indymedia broke the Diebold source code story.

    20. Re:Hardware too... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Why is it that no one who supports indymedia can provide LINKS to backup what they are saying?

    21. Re:Hardware too... by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      perhaps you could visit some the many Indymedia sites for yourself?

    22. Re:Hardware too... by DAldredge · · Score: 0

      I have, I can't get past all the Jew bashing and the blaiming of Israel for every problem in the world.

      My point still stands. People hype IM like it's great but can not point out 5 major things it has done and then back up what they are saying.

      IndyMedia makes /. look mature

    23. Re:Hardware too... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      Wonder if there was any way for them to get something like MAC addresses (or even IPs) from any logs on there so they can track down individuals who posted content...

    24. Re:Hardware too... by IncohereD · · Score: 1

      At that time, I had never heard of the massive demonstrations that happened in Seattle in 1999.

      I clearly remember seeing pictures of cops in riot gear in Seattle on good old my.yahoo.com back in the day, so this is a bit misleading. Not that I don't agree with you in general.

    25. Re:Hardware too... by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      funny, I did not notice any "Jew bashing" - most of the issues are local to the individual countries. You don't have a point, unless you're a troll. And even trolls are pointless without a sense of humour.

    26. Re:Hardware too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe it was somehow "mistaken" (by you?), but how can "... *I* had never heard of the massive demonstrations ..." be considered misleading? not everybody reads Yahoo after all

      GrimRC

  3. so.... by Anubis350 · · Score: 0

    so the servers are being re-served?

    --
    "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
  4. Switzerland and Italy by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

    The wire reports last week (sorry, no link at the moment) had an FBI spokesperson who said they were acting at the request of the Swiss and Italian governments, under the terms of a law-enforcement-cooperation treaty. Apparently the FBI was involved because Rackspace is a US company.

    The only likely explanation for why those governments would be interested that has surfaced so far is that Indymedia posted some photographs that were taken of undercover police officers who were photographing demonstrators (the demonstrators photographed their photographers, as it were). Apparently this is illegal in Europe?

    It's all very murky, in any case.

    1. Re:Switzerland and Italy by metlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, makes sense.

      If some of them were undercover agents, their lives might be in danger for all you know.

      If I were an undercover agent and if photographs of me were on the web showing me in places where I ought not to be, it's quite understandable.

      But what I do not understandable is why they would do this in a way that gets them so much attention. I mean, now all those pictures would be all over the place and would be quite uncontrollable. It would have the opposite effect of what they intended.

      Weird. Or maybe I'm missing something. Or maybe I just need more coffee.

    2. Re:Switzerland and Italy by 6.023e23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a fairly complicated international connect-the-dots scenario. Just goes to show that immunity from prosecution and/or seizure and the supposed boundaries of jurisdiction are not exactly cut and dry issues. I suspect this type of multinational effort will be seen more in the near future.

    3. Re:Switzerland and Italy by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      Well, if you're attempting to spread the identity of an uncercover officer, it may very well be illegal.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    4. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Merkins · · Score: 2, Funny
      If some of them were undercover agents, their lives might be in danger for all you know.


      oooh, the NOC list


    5. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Gorath99 · · Score: 5, Informative
      The only likely explanation for why those governments would be interested that has surfaced so far is that Indymedia posted some photographs that were taken of undercover police officers who were photographing demonstrators (the demonstrators photographed their photographers, as it were). Apparently this is illegal in Europe?

      Compromising the identity of undercover police officers is something that is frowned on by governments worldwide. Don't know if it's actually illegal in Italy or Switzerland though.

      In any case, it's a bit weird to generalise Italy and Switzerland to all of Europe. European countries all have their own laws, though members of the EU (which Switzerland isn't) share a lot of common laws. Not that I blame you for doing so - it's a common mistake for foreigners - but I felt I should set that straight.
    6. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, err, did they name these people as undercover agents, or for all anyone who was browsing the site knew they were pictures of tourists taking pictures of a protest?

      Switzerland and/or Italy must be way understaffed if they have to expend their undercover agents on something as stupidly obvious as standing around in plain sight and photographing crowds.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    7. Re:Switzerland and Italy by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The ridiculous part of it, was the photos HAD been (as far as I remember) redacted in the form of face blur/blacking, after an initial FBI approach.

      This action was merely harassment.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    8. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If some of them were undercover agents, their lives might be in danger for all you know.

      If I were an undercover agent and if photographs of me were on the web showing me in places where I ought not to be, it's quite understandable.


      No it's not. Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic. If they were serious about taking photos to put into some big database somewhere or whatever, they could easily have done it with telephoto lenses from a distance such that the photographees did not know they were being photographed.

      Instead, it sounds like they stood right out in front of the demonstrators and made it a point to be seen by the people. But, the idiots who thought a little public intimidation would be a good thing forgot about one minor detail - the freaking internet.

      From the reports, it sounds like they just got a little more sauce of the goose than they could handle. So they tried to take their toys and go home.

      Either that, or there is something completely unrelated going on the undercover agent thing is just a thin cover story. Aren't conspiracies great?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Switzerland and Italy by sg_oneill · · Score: 3, Interesting


      Compromising the identity of undercover police officers is something that is frowned on by governments worldwide. Don't know if it's actually illegal in Italy or Switzerland though.


      The problem of course here is that protestors for years had been desparately pointing out that agent provocaters had been the ones stirring up strife at protests, and not them.

      Those cops where in classic black block garb, and provide some solid evidence of cops infiltrating to cause trouble.

      I think protestors have a right to get this information out, simply because it provides some evidence towards clearing the innocence of a lot of people who have been entrapped into acts of madness by people who have less than altruistic intentions towards 'the movement'.

      I assure you, if a spook was giving me grief, I'd expose his ass quicker than he can blink.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    10. Re:Switzerland and Italy by linzeal · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Intimadation is the first place where you will find a whole host of unwritten rules on interacting with those in power. Obey, citizen of irrational governance, obey.

    11. Re:Switzerland and Italy by jrockway · · Score: 0, Troll

      Then why are intelligence agencies taking pictures of me? "Don't take my picture, but please submit to me when I take yours." That's fair.

      Obey, citizen, obey. We're only here to help.

      Besides, we had no proof that they were undercover agents until the governments blabbed about it.

      Gov't: "Take down the pictures of undercover agents."
      "Criminals": "What, they're undercover agents? We didn't know that but now we do. Boys, dispatch the gunmen!"

      Good work guys. (Frankly I hope all the undercover agents get shot at now, they don't personally deserve it but that's just the risk of doing the job. What goes around comes around.)

      --
      My other car is first.
    12. Re:Switzerland and Italy by piranha(jpl) · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I got harassed for taking photographs of several French police officers (in uniforms) in a subway station. They were not the subject of the photographs. Read.

    13. Re:Switzerland and Italy by refactored · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Dunno, seems to be standard intelligence practice.

      They always did so in the bad old days of South African apartheid, they seem to do it here in New Zealand.

      The most deeply held belief of these coinops types is that all popular activism is orchestrated by enemy agitators. (After all that is what _they_ would/are do/doing...)

      For them to believe otherwise is to begin to suspect that their own dastardly deeds are wrong.

      Thus they are always there, on the fringes, taking photographs and trying to correlate them to spot the real ringleaders.

      Sort of sad really.

      You may be tempted to wear concealing sunglasses and a hat next time you protest something, but odds on that will really convince them you're the "black hat" and they will put the hard question to you on the spot.

    14. Re:Switzerland and Italy by h4rm0ny · · Score: 5, Informative


      No it's not. Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic.

      Definitely! If you've ever been on a protest in the UK then see how you like it when a policeman starts jamming camcorders at you and efficiently recording everyone's faces. They especially zoom in on anyone who is particularly vocal. And they are conspicuously overt in doing so.

      Point one back at them and you'll likely get your phone/camera/camcorder seized. They sure don't like the same medicine. And as to the poster elsewhere who said that undercover officers lives could be in danger - these aren't undercover officers in this instance, and what about our freedom from harrasment. Being on government subversive files can become a health hazard.

      I recommend mass deployment of those cheap disposable cameras at the next march.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    15. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a fairly complicated international connect-the-dots scenario. Just goes to show that immunity from prosecution and/or seizure and the supposed boundaries of jurisdiction are not exactly cut and dry issues. I suspect this type of multinational effort will be seen more in the near future.

      What happened to the sovereignty of legitimate states and the individual rights of citizens in those states? Kerry and his buddies are all for this sort of international law / harmonization / no boundaries crap. Are you sure you Slashdot US democrats / left-winger's really want this man as president? If you think Patriot is bad, just wait till someone like Kerry tries to take it global.

      BTW, I'm not saying Patriot doesn't have major flaws. It does. But do note that Kerry helped write some of the worst of it!

      See this article:
      http://www.reason.com/hod/jb072604.shtml

    16. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      someone made 3 copies of it on microfiche! alert team america!

    17. Re:Switzerland and Italy by tehdaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I recommend mass deployment of small cardboard boxes painted to look like cameras. If everyone had 3 or 4, and they all took TONS of pictures.... With a few real ones thrown in I guess.

      --
      Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
    18. Re:Switzerland and Italy by waynelorentz · · Score: 1

      I was taking some pictures of a cathedral in Vienna when some heavily-armed police officers walked past. I immediatley stopped until they were gone. I make it a policy not to take pictures of people who are carrying guns. I guess you just got unlucky. I know that the United States is supposed to be the wild West and the rest of the world more civilized, but an American it freaks me out whenever I'm in another country and see policemen carrying machine guns (so far, in France and Austria).

    19. Re:Switzerland and Italy by WhiteDeath · · Score: 1

      I recommend mass deployment of those cheap disposable cameras at the next march.

      while a couple of them might get away, I doubt they would be much point - your chance of success is low.

      Better approaches are:

      * Wireless/WiFi devices that dump the images back to a laptop in a nearby location, where they are uploaded to many locations on the internet. Encrypt the hard drive so the sites can't be extracted easily. Store the keys on an external device such as a thumb drive, floppy or CD that can be physically destroyed at the slightest problem (actually the key device doesn't even have to be taken to the site - as long as the computer can be left turned on for the whole operation).
      Downside: a jammer will kill this far too easily, and your laptop will be located and taken unless it has a receive-only wireless connection of some kind.

      * just sit way back with a big zoom lens - and have the pictures pop up from time to time on free web spaces (accessed only from public locations). Whenever they take pictures of demonstrators, just upload a few more of your own. They have no way to even know who you are, or which events you attend until it's way too late!
      Downside: A lot harder to get a good angle for the shots you need.

    20. Re:Switzerland and Italy by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. The guy is an undercover cop right? So he is on the street, in street clothes and somebody took pictures of him right? So why is this a crime?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    21. Re:Switzerland and Italy by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The European Union has fairly extensive laws governing personal privacy and the right to ensure that information is fair and accurate. Indeed, technically, any European business that hands personal information to a US business or Government agency is commiting a crime, because the US is deemed by European law to not protect the rights of individuals.


      Unfortunately, this does not cover law enforcement work, otherwise Indymedia and RackSpace could sue any European Government involved for privacy violations. (Even with that out, it may be possible for Indymedia and RackSpace to get a British court to impose some kind of restraining order. If there's no legal case involved, then a judge may be inclined to be sympathetic, as the raid would appear to abuse the trust implicit in the exemption.


      That's a long-shot, though. By far the best bet for the Indymedia group would be to create some lurid sex fantasy involving Swiss and American agents, orgies, slavery and debauchery of the worst possible kinds. They could almost certainly get The Sun or someone like them to publish such tripe, and probably for a decent fee. The Governments can't sue for libel/slander, without confessing to what they were doing in the first place, which they'd never do. With luck, the story'd be believed by enough people (let's face it, after the goings on in Iraqi prisons, who wouldn't believe it of Americans?) to become generally accepted and possibly turned into a hit movie.


      (P.S. If it does become a hit movie, I either get to play one of the agents, or I get a cut of the profit. I don't care much which.)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    22. Re:Switzerland and Italy by mpe · · Score: 1

      If I were an undercover agent and if photographs of me were on the web showing me in places where I ought not to be, it's quite understandable.

      The same would apply if you were fimed by a television news crew or a security camera.

    23. Re:Switzerland and Italy by j_w_d · · Score: 1

      The story is silly. It paints the Swiss law enforcement as incompetents. If they were under cover, what moron identified them as operatives in the first place? The police would not have. Anyone can stand around the fringes of a protest and take pictures and there are lots of news stringers that do. I think you are right that something is missing, probably the truth.

      --
      ------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
    24. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Syriloth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or even a few hundred disposable cameras. Get everybody to buy one, or have some organization distributing them widely during the protest. Would make it much harder to stop the recording.

    25. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Max+von+H. · · Score: 5, Informative

      I was in the incriminated demonstration (didn't have much choice, the whole city got into it) and clearly saw cops in civilian triggering some strange chains of events. On the right side we had peaceful demonstrators (about a million) and on the other a group of about 200 rioteers (the Black Block) helped by some suburb scum. The local police let them rampage most of the downtown area by lack of orders from their superiors (the cops just sat and watch the shopping district being looted...). On the second riot night, the cops begun acting on their own. Nasty. They pushed the rioteers near where a big indy center was hosting indy press offices etc. (nothing to do with the rioteers - it was a peaceful demo). Civilian cops suddenly burst into the building, breaking doors and everything worth anything (computers, music instruments), for no apparent reason. Those cops also beat up several of my friends with baseball bats, several of which ended up in hospital getting their heads stitched. The bad guys never really got to worry, since the "authorities" obviously had another agenda: undermining the peaceful demonstrator's organization.

      The root of Indymedia's problems is that there are photos of some Swiss police agents (with their names and addresses, hehe) infiltrating the Black Block and triggering riots. There are photos of cops beating up people. There are photos of cops attacking a restaurant for no reason (firing CS grenades on a full terrace half a mile from the real events then shooting people with rubber bullets). Without these cops, there probably wouldn't have been that much damage to the downtown area of Geneva.

      The Swiss authorities behaved in such a spastic way they don't want their stupid agents to be recognized, for they are not respectable in their actions and deliberately triggered events eventually costing millions to the community and injuring quite many innocents. I feel ashamed my government is turning to such tactics to undermine the anti-globalization movement.

      It makes me smile though to see the incriminated images have now spread to about 400 mirrors worldwide instead of 2 or 3 sites. Our local authorities are going batshit about it, yelling they'll have ALL the servers containing those images seized... Tough luck, assholes!

      --
      -- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
    26. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It would be great if a police officer was taking pictures of protestors, and then a couple seconds later the police officer is surounded by fifty to a hundred people blinding him with the flash of their cameras.

    27. Re:Switzerland and Italy by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Well firstly if they're undercover then how would a member of the public know that?

      Secondly, these are photos in a public place, you could accidentally photograph all kinds of security personnel if they are walking along the street in a busy city. If a member of the public doesn't know who they are then what's the problem?

    28. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you get a life...

    29. Re:Switzerland and Italy by hughk · · Score: 1

      Don't you just love Multimedia Messaging web logs? You can the photo of a police photographer onto an offshore blog before they can handcuff you. Your phone is useless because you have already sent the images.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    30. Re:Switzerland and Italy by n54 · · Score: 1

      Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic

      I might have read you wrong but a statement like that puts you right in the middle of the small groups of people who don't think any system (usually exempt your/their own) should be able to protect themselves. They feign not to realize (or comprehend) that the state does so at the behest of most of us (you might want to call us "them" or something else more omnious sounding suiting your worldview, we're the majority).

      In case you don't know it taking pictures of police officers (undercover or not) is a typical method of violent fringe groups in europe (communists, nazis and other types of facists) as well as organised crime (overlapping categories but I doubt you'll agree to that, at least said groups certainly dont).

      Sure it's intimidating but it's a lot better than the "shoot-on-sight" alternative the groups being monitored usually end up advocating. Get real, they (and possibly you) are not convincing anyone otherwise but the most feebleminded and luckily for the rest of us those end up being a disadvantage to the "causes".

      Police in europe also take pictures of already known persons and whoever seems to act as leaders and instigators in larger demonstrations held on less controvercial topics for information/intelligence gathering and because most of these demonstrations are usually exploited by the fringe groups for networking, legitamacy and recruitment (all of which are very well suited by a demonstrations which usually by it's nature comprises of people willing to abandon individuality for at least the duration of the demonstration).

      --
      this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
    31. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trust a slashdotter to completely ruin a good demonstration by boring everyone to death with his geekness

    32. Re:Switzerland and Italy by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      If no one knew they were undercover agents why were their pictures being distributed?

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    33. Re:Switzerland and Italy by tyndyll · · Score: 1
      .. and the UK and US

      The ever popular Register has some more information on this and have raised the point that a question is being asked at the House of Parliament today to the Secretary of State as to whether or not he authorised the seizure.

      --
      Morale seems good, considering, although high spirits are just no substitute for eight hundred rounds a minute
    34. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were an undercover agent, and I had my picture taken, in public, in the act of photographing groups of citizens exercising their inalienable right to protest, then I might be forced to the conclusion that I was no damned good at my job, and request a transfer to something like traffic, where being easily visible is considered a good thing..

    35. Re:Switzerland and Italy by tyndyll · · Score: 1

      Apologies - Parliament Link, question but to the Secretary of State David Blunkett by Lynne Jones, MP for Birmingham and a member of the Commons Science & Technology Select Committee. Apparently the legality of the action is already being questioned.

      --
      Morale seems good, considering, although high spirits are just no substitute for eight hundred rounds a minute
    36. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Definitely! If you've ever been on a protest in the UK then see how you like it when a policeman starts jamming camcorders at you and efficiently recording everyone's faces. They especially zoom in on anyone who is particularly vocal. And they are conspicuously overt in doing so.

      I thought that the whole point of a protest was to be seen. There's no point to protesting if the target doesn't notice you've done anything. My understanding is that most protesters are very keen to be seen, recorded, and rebroadcast by the mainstream media, bloggers, tourists, and whomever else happens to be about. Saying "I'm going to go out in a public place, make a lot of noice, march about, and wave signs--but I only want some people to videotape me doing it!" seems a tad disingenuous.

      The police pay particular attention to the most "vocal" individuals? Well, no surprise there. That's who everyone else is paying attention to as well. People with megaphones tend to attract one's notice, whether you want them to or not. Indeed, that's presumably their goal.

      Is it police intimidation to record a protest? It's an interesting question. There's an argument that having a record of attendees at a large gathering--and particularly of the most vocal leaders--is good police practice in the event that something untoward does happen.

      If you're at a protest or rally, then you shouldn't be doing anything illegal that will be caught on tape. Chanting, speaking, and waving signs are all generally legitimate, legal practices. If you're leading a group and encouraging them all to do something illegal, you probably should be recorded and charged. Take your lumps like a man. Civil disobedience involves facing the risk of punishment. Gandhi did it.

      Police bringing cameras to a protest "intimidates" protestors in the same way that a cop on the corner intimidates pedestrians. It inconveniences you if you want to smash a window; otherwise it is--or should be--moot.

      Being on government subversive files can become a health hazard.

      Historically and in some countries this has been the case. Is there evidence to support this statement now, in Britain?

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    37. Re:Switzerland and Italy by anime_layer · · Score: 1

      There was just today a report in a swiss newspaper stating that the swiss department in charge of issuing law-enforcemet request did not issue one for the Indymedia case. The police of Geneva is investigating in this case and there's the possibility that they are in direct contact to the american authorities but for serious matters like confiscating servers a proper law-enforcement-cooperation request, issued by the proper department (who did not issue one), would be needed.

    38. Re:Switzerland and Italy by sepluv · · Score: 1
      But what I do not understandable...It would have the opposite effect of what they intended.

      Umm...they're the FBI.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    39. Re:Switzerland and Italy by TyrranzzX · · Score: 1

      If I were an undercover agent, I wouldn't be standing ontop of the building with my face out in the open with a camera. Stand behind a window or something you bloody morons.

    40. Re:Switzerland and Italy by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      are not exactly cut and dry issues.
      If anyone is interested in this phrase, the correct form is "cut and dried". It refers to crops like tobacco that have to be cut and then hung up to dry out before they are ready to be used. It's usage as a phrase is that when it has been "cut and dried", it has already been processed and is ready for use.
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    41. Re:Switzerland and Italy by pclminion · · Score: 1
      I know that the United States is supposed to be the wild West and the rest of the world more civilized, but an American it freaks me out whenever I'm in another country and see policemen carrying machine guns (so far, in France and Austria).

      Heh. Try Israel. Not only machine guns, but grenade launchers, tear gas launchers and big, scary-ass knives. Whoa.

    42. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Nurseman · · Score: 1
      No it's not. Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic.

      Exactly how is photographing someone in public, at a public demonstration intimidation ? Don't the demonstrators also photgraph the police ? You have the right to assemble and be heard. The police have the right to enforce the law. I dont see how photographing you in a public place violates your rights, or intimidates you.

      --
      Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
    43. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 1

      While I do agree with what you have said, I would ask the same question about the police officers; why should they fear being recorded? If all they are doing is routine police work, and not abusing thier authority, they should be happy to be recorded as it creates a record of thier legit activities. Moreover, since the public has entrusted them with special priviledges there is a very good reason for all of thier activities to be recorded. In all, if the siezures are about people taking pictures of police officers in public somthing is very wrong. If the police are going to try and use the idea of "no privacy in public" to record the activities of normal citizens, normals citizens should be allowed to record police officers in public, undercover or not.

      --
      Necessity is the mother of invention.
      Laziness is the father.
    44. Re:Switzerland and Italy by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I dont see how photographing you in a public place violates your rights, or intimidates you.

      While it may not violate rights, why would the police need photos of people unless they are using them to keep tabs on the activities of citizens? The feeling you get from this is that your photo will be placed in a database of "potential terrorists." That is not acceptable to me.

      Of course, the people who would show up to protest are generally the type that think the government has such a database and wouldn't hesitate to use it: the police know this, and to make a big deal about it is to play to those fears. Hence, intimidation.

      Personally, I don't have a problem with that, as long as there is no issue with individuals taking pictures of the police. When the police or government tries to mug the protestors of their cameras or images, I object strongly.

    45. Re:Switzerland and Italy by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > they will put the hard question to you on the spot.

      Which they should have no right to do, unless they witness you concealing something in your jacket, or you have a bulge shaped strangely similar to a shotgun...

    46. Re:Switzerland and Italy by Nurseman · · Score: 1
      Personally, I don't have a problem with that, as long as there is no issue with individuals taking pictures of the police. When the police or government tries to mug the protestors of their cameras or images, I object strongly.

      Absolutley agree with you. Both side need to follow the law. If the police step over that line, like they may have done here in NYC with some bike protests, they should be prosocuted as well. I am all for punishing the police who break the law. Ten years in the ER, I saw just as many bad cops, as bad criminals.

      --
      Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
    47. Re:Switzerland and Italy by jschottm · · Score: 1

      ---
      Historically and in some countries this has been the case. Is there evidence to support this statement now, in Britain?
      ---

      I don't know, why don't you ask Japanese-Americans who were alive during WWII, or someone suspected of being involved with communism or labour during the 50s in the United States about how free citizens of the United States are? Or how about leaders of civil rights? You are aware of the fact that the *FBI* attempted to blackmail Martin Luther King, Jr., are you not?

    48. Re:Switzerland and Italy by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      Gandhi did it.

      Gandhi is a particular hero of mine. I doubt I have the strength to act as he did however. I'd like to take an easier path to justice. I appreciate what you're saying in a Devil's Advocate way, but do you genuinely believe this bit:

      Police bringing cameras to a protest "intimidates" protestors in the same way that a cop on the corner intimidates pedestrians. It inconveniences you if you want to smash a window; otherwise it is--or should be--moot.

      At a protest you are challenging the powers that be which takes courage. The police (especially when they chase a protestor down a street with dogs, as happened to someone very close to me) are representatives of these powers. They want, in fact need to establish their authority. This can only be done through intimidation. Filming someone, saying "we're watching you, we have power over you," is extremely intimidating. But I think you know that.

      Historically and in some countries this has been the case. Is there evidence to support this statement now, in Britain?

      Numerous cases, extant and recent. But beyond these, on principle I think citizens of a country should be free to state their mind and refuse to co-operate with the government (e.g. sell salt). Secret political files that have nothing to do with a crime, but only on whether someone has dared to criticise the powerful is far far too reminiscent of certain historical events for me to be comfortable with it.

      Power to the people, eh?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  5. True Reason behind the shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I heard the real reason the machines were seized was because they hosted goatse.cx.

    Apparently the FBI agents decided that they, and GWB had been tricked one too many times

    1. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would the moron giving out "interesting" mods to obvious jokes kindly post a reply, so the mod is invalidated? Thanks.

      Kids, don't smoke and mod!

    2. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fool me once......

    3. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by pHatidic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Good prank to play on GWB: Tell him to call you and that your phone number is 9-113-1147 (or basically 9-11x-xxxx). I always used to put that on those notecards the teachers would pass around for you to write your contact info on during the first day of classes so that if the teacher ever had to call my mom they'd end up getting a visit from the cops. Oh yeah and if anyone asks why the prefix is a 9, just say its because it's your cellphone. Poor computer science teacher, didn't know what hit him until he was getting bent over and frisked by 3 large cops after he tried to call my friend's parents to complain.

    4. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by sharkey · · Score: 0, Troll

      I dunno. He doesn't look disturbed to me.


      Note, do NOT follow that link if you are faint of heart.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    5. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by Solstice · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yea. That's a great idea. Tie up the emergency system and the cops for your little prank. There's a reason why the cops showed up - they thought someone was in trouble. But obviously, you thought your prank was more important than someone else's life.

    6. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note, do NOT follow that link if you are faint of heart.

      *can't resist*
      *clicks*
      OMG!! the monkey face!!

    7. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by Facekhan · · Score: 1

      A guy I know works for a company with a 1888 number the the 1800 version of that number is a sex line. New employees make easy targets.

    8. Re:True Reason behind the shutdown by jrockway · · Score: 1

      Umm, did HE dial the number? No. I don't see anything wrong with that other than that such moronic people are teaching our children :)

      --
      My other car is first.
  6. I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by nlinecomputers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who knows what is going on at Rackspace as they aren't talking. I'd be finding a new hardware host ASAP.

    --
    Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
    1. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the one hand, that makes sense, but on the other hand it seems really unfair for Rackspace to lose their business over this. They're just as much the victim here as their clients are.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    2. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by HiThere · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, if they aren't willing to go to bat for their clients, how can their clients trust them? If RackSpace made any legal protests, I haven't seen the reports.

      So it seems to me that any business that RackSpace loses, they deserve to lose. Even if it goes as far as all of it.

      OTOH, I do expect that most of their clients will just say "It didn't happen to me, so I'm safe." This doesn't mean that I think that RackSpace doesn't deserve to lose those clients too. I just don't believe that they will. I.e., the punishment will be much less than is merited, but that's as their clients chose.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Agreed, it's one thing to expect an ISP or hosting company to put up resistance when a company sends meaningless cease and desist letters. It's another thing entirely when court orders show up on the CEO's desk and government agents show up to get the servers. What the hell would you do if you were Rackspace? Defy a court order? Tell the feds in both the US and the UK to get lost?


      The biggest problem here is the gag order stuff and lack of information. I don't understand why Rackspace is unable to comment on the issue, and if they are really under a gag order, which government put that in place? It's bad enough to go around shutting down websites of even obnoxious groups like IndyMedia, but the whole super-secret double probation thing reeks of US anti-terrorist paranoid Republican bullshit. There is never a reason to not disclose why you are shutting down a journalistic organization (even of the nutty variety) or to squelch the free discussion of said shutdown by secret gag orders.

    4. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by ArsonPanda · · Score: 1

      Well, if they aren't willing to go to bat for their clients, how can their clients trust them
      Uh, It was the FBI, and they had a *court order*. This isn't a take down notice from the RIAA we're talking about here. What would have them do? Barricade themselves in the sever rooms with shotguns?

      --

      --I don't want the world, I just want your half.
    5. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One is supposed to be able to protest this in court. Quite possibly it wouldn't have been heard yet, but the protest should have long since been filed.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by pingveno · · Score: 1

      There was a sopeana. What are they going to do, lay down in front of the servers in protest? Come on, no sane company is going to resist the force of a court unless they enjoy heavy fines.

      --
      "it's not about aptitude, it's the way you're viewed" - Galinda
    7. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it seems really unfair for Rackspace to lose their business over this. They're just as much the victim here as their clients are.
      It's unfair, but the unfairness is not perpetrated by the fleeing customers. If you rehost because you can't trust the hardware anymore, then that's just life. Pin the blame where it belongs: Issuing a gag order is a destructive act. Maybe citizens of jurisictions where this shit happens, need to start bitching about it and tell their government they don't want it to be possible for frivolous gag orders to happen.
    8. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by ti.payn · · Score: 1

      What I would want to see from Rackspace is one, single indication that they cared about this action. Were I Rackspace (to answer your question) I would have put something in the Press Release out that indicated that although I couldn't do anything about it, I wasn't happy about having to do this to one of my customers. I understand the corporate CYA play that Rackspace made, but I think there are other hosts in the world (and Rackspace is acatually one of the most expensive hosts around).

    9. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if they aren't willing to go to bat for their clients, how can their clients trust them

      Uh, It was the FBI, and they had a *court order*. This isn't a take down notice from the RIAA we're talking about here. What would have them do? Barricade themselves in the sever rooms with shotguns?


      Even if they had an order from God, the allmighty himself, they still would need a proper search warant from a UK judge. So yes, this is not more than you or me giving them the order to hand over the disk. Last i knew is that in the EU there are no secret laws, so any search warrant has to state why it has been issued.

    10. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by horza · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, that makes sense, but on the other hand it seems really unfair for Rackspace to lose their business over this. They're just as much the victim here as their clients are.

      Rackspace is not the victim. They are a business, and their job is to best serve their customer. They have failed to do this, and even to explain their reasons to the paying customer, and so anyone hosting at Rackspace would be right in taking their business elsewhere.

      We just had this discussion where someone used a fake Hotmail account to email ISPs and succeeded in closing down legitimate sites. The best provider is the Dutch provider xs4all. You pays your money and you take the consequences.

      It may well be that law enforcement had good reason to seize the drives. There may well be some international treaty to make the seizure legal. The failure of Rackspace to communicate who has presented a court order and why seems difficult to fathom at this point.

      Phillip.

    11. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by Ewan · · Score: 1

      In the UK (where the servers are), under the RIP act, Rackspace are not allowed to discuss the court order, generally they're not even allowed to say there is one.

      Ewan

    12. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by crawling_chaos · · Score: 1
      I would guess that the business that they lose over this incident is worth far less than the complete and total shutdown that a contempt of court order would have brought. Furthermore, Rackspace would then have lost further business as the well-oiled smear machine on the Right painted them as supporting "terrah."

      Rackspace is not a political organization. They are vendors. Never, never expect your vendors to stand up to John Law, unless the vendor in question is your lawyer. It just isn't good business.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    13. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by CantGetAUserName · · Score: 1

      Um, that's not all that surprising. They're not even allowed to say who put that gag order on - you think that even if they are allowed to protest they're allowed to mention to anyone that they're doing it?

      --
      Semper en excreta sumus solum profundum
    14. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      *court order*s need to be raised in the country in which the order is to be served. The servers in question were outside the jurisdiction of the FBI and US courts, so any *court order* should have come from the UK courts. While the UK often bends over backwards to help the FBI, that does not extend to US *court order*s being valid in the UK. But apparently Rackspace could not give a damn whether it was legal or not. As a result, no right thinking UK citizen should trust them with their data.

    15. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Why would filing a legal protest cause their business to be shut down?

      Rackspace may not be a political organization, but this doesn't mean that they are free to handle their clients data wantonly without repercussions. Now wantonly may be an unfair characterisation, but I haven't been able to come up with a better one.

      I'm not asking that they violate any laws, merely that they file legal protests when they are coerced into violation of their clients businesses, rather than just rolling over. If they aren't allowed to tell their client so much as which court issued the search warrant, then they are the ONLY party that can so act, and therefore it is incumbent upon them to do so. To act otherwise violates most commonly accepted business ethics.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    16. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      How do you know they didn't protest? That's the nature of a gag order - you can't tell. Any protest filed would have been just a secret as the takedown order.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    17. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      The court order includes a rule that you can't give any further details to anybody. By asking rackspace to break that order, you are asking them to not just merely protest a bad law to go to bat for you, but to also actually break the law to go to bat for you. Is it a bad law that it is legal for the authorities to prevent someone from passing on this information to their clients? Absolutely. Should it be challenged in court? Absolutely. Is it a business's obligation, however, to break the law in order to trigger such a challenge for one of their clients? No. Any business willing to do this and take the risk would be martyring themselves for a cause.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    18. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by crawling_chaos · · Score: 1
      I'm not asking that they violate any laws, merely that they file legal protests when they are coerced into violation of their clients businesses, rather than just rolling over. If they aren't allowed to tell their client so much as which court issued the search warrant, then they are the ONLY party that can so act, and therefore it is incumbent upon them to do so. To act otherwise violates most commonly accepted business ethics. The problem is with the law, not "commonly accepted business ethics." The law (which is horrendous, by the way) states that Rackspace is gagged. Speaking out on it would immediately cause a contempt order, in fact I bet the governments lawyers already have the paperwork drafted to request one.

      In the end, you are asking a business to do something that will cost it a lot of money. Businesses do not exist to engage in moral crusades, they exist to make the stockholders happy. Ugly? Yes, but it's also reality.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    19. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1


      I'm not asking that they violate any laws, merely that they file legal protests

      With the gag order in place, for all we know they just might have done that, and just can't talk about it (without violating a law).

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    20. Re:I'd be treating the serverfarm as hacked too. by The+Snowman · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, that makes sense, but on the other hand it seems really unfair for Rackspace to lose their business over this. They're just as much the victim here as their clients are.

      Rackspace has a history of ignoring us little people (e.g. spam complaints) while going overboard when the FBI even thinks about shutting down one of their sites. I have had a couple run-ins with their sysadmins because I had a known, verified source of fradulant spam and web sites on their network, but they refused to acknowledge me. Then when the FBI comes along, they gladly yank hard drives and everything, tripping over their own feet to please the feds.

      Disclaimer: I do not work for this company, but I have to recommend them for enterprise-class web hosting: pair Networks. They are a FreeBSD based web host with excellent prices, support, uptime, etc. I have yet to be let down by them. Even their shared servers perform well because they do not overload them like Rackspace and others do.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
  7. wellll by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

    Indymedia is not aware as to whether Rackspace is still under gag order.
    I would tell you, but then I'd have to kill you

    --
    "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
  8. returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've never heard of someone getting back confiscated items.
    Is there any obligation for them to do this, or is it media exposure at this point?

    1. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Anti_zeitgeist · · Score: 0

      kind of makes you think.....what did they do to the hardware when they returned it.

      --
      If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
    2. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not speaking from personal experience here, but I've read of FBI confiscation of hard drives before. Apparently, the "we're seizing all your servers' hard drives" tactic isn't new.

      They try to get the disks back in a timely fashion, when they're through with their analysis. It's completely different than, say, having your car impounded as you're arrested selling suitcases full of coke. They're taking the drives not because they were used in the commission of a crime (necessarily), but because they want evidence off of them, possibly just incidental.

      No word on legal obligations, but I can say, based on what I've read (again, no personal experience here), the FBI does make a reasonable attempt to not inconvenience you *too* horribly if they have to take your disks.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    3. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by KronicD · · Score: 4, Informative

      In 1998 I had a machine seized by the AFP (Australian Federal Police), I wasn't charged and was never informed as to why my equipment was being seized.

      However, 3 months after the incident they offered to return the data to me if i supplied a hard disk, I did this and the information was returned as promised.

      Another 6 months later, with much pressuring from an attounry provided by legal aid (the government paid for my lawyer because im a poor student), the rest of my equipment was returned along with the original hard disks and data.

      I'm really not sure why any of this happened, however it is an example of law enforcement returning confiscated items.

      --
      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
    4. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Not sure. Law may be different in the UK. They are a US company, so the FBI was involved, but it's UK soil so UK jursidiction. Also depends on what the reason for the siezure was. Maybe they can only hold it in cases of ongoing criminal activity (like accounting for illegal bussiness) which is probably what is usually seized.

      Also do the servers belong to Indymedia or to Rackspace? Could make a difference if Indymedia comitted the crime, but using Rackspace's property, without Rackspace's knowledge.

      Hard to say given it's not a US jursidiction, and it sounds like the accusing agency isn't UK or US.

    5. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haxordot.org?

    6. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by cmacb · · Score: 1

      I only have direct experience with two. In one case the machines were not returned for a year or so, and I think by the time they were they had been written off and replaced anyway.

      In the other case, involving a very small company the hardware (which wasn't in very good shape to begin with) was returned in a month or so and some of it had actually been repaired (not sure if this was them being nice or just a byproduct of the investigative process).

      My guess is that the results vary greatly based on the mood and free time available to the techs involved.

    7. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they finally got a clue and realized it's cheaper/easier for themselves just to image the drives and give them back. (Rather than deal with lawyers 6 months later.)

    8. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by pacodease · · Score: 1

      It is kind of strange that they would return the originals. I imagine that would mean there was nothing on the drives which had any value as evidence or the drive was worth more returned with the hope that someone would retreave something off the drive that was there originally or added by the FBI.

      I imagine the actual drives on the computer will never again be networked, but alot of the content might.

    9. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      There's a clear legal obligation. And usually, after a sufficient number of years, they will be willing to return them, if you keep asking. 10 years will usually suffice.

      Appearantly though there is a clear legal obligation to return the siezed "evidence", there's no enforcement mechanism to ensure that it is returned as soon as it is no longer needed for evidence, or that it is returned in operating condition. Still, I've heard of many cases where they actually DID eventually return the hardware. Years after it had become obsolete.

      If you don't have a fancy PR agent and a good lawyer, don't hold your breath, even if, possibly especially if, there's no case to be made.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      What crime? Why are you presuming guilt, when there's no evidence of such presented?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    11. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Fine, alleged crime if you want to be a grammar nazi. I mean they are suspected of a crime, hence the actions. Sorry if my terminology in an informal, hastily written post isn't precise enough for your exacting standards (in other words: loosen up).

    12. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by HiThere · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But I haven't heard of any crime being alleged. No reason has been given.

      This isn't just being a grammar nazi, this is complaining about a gross violation of proper search warrant procedure.

      Now if, as some are alleging, it was the British and not the FBI who conducted the raid, on what warrant were THEY acting on? No record has so far surfaced. No report of any alleged crime.

      This sounds an awful lot like somebody high up saying "shut up those bastards", and somebody lower down, who can't find an legitimate grounds, acting on illegitimate grounds that are probably "safe enough". (In other words, he guesses that it can't be legally pinned on him, even though it's blatantly and grossly illegal.)

      Now I could easily be wrong. Most of the information is being kept secret. But that's what it sounds like. That theory is consistent with everything that's been revealed, and inconsistent with nothing that's been revealed. I accept that there could be alternate explanations, but I haven't heard any that appeared consistent to me.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    13. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Piquan · · Score: 3, Informative

      The best-documented federal seizure of HDDs that I know of (it's referred to in many court cases) is the Secret Service's raid on Steve Jackson Games.

    14. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never heard of someone getting back confiscated items.
      Is there any obligation for them to do this, or is it media exposure at this point?


      A friend of mine, 15 years ago, in New Jersey USA, had his legally owned RIFLE taken by the police after he fired it in self defense at someone trying to break into his hotel room.

      After a couple of months, the case went before the town judge who told the police THEY were breaking the law and to immediately return the rifle. He got it back that very day.

    15. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by Richard+W.M.+Jones · · Score: 1

      Apparently, the "we're seizing all your servers' hard drives" tactic isn't new. [...] They're taking the drives not because they were used in the commission of a crime (necessarily), but because they want evidence off of them, possibly just incidental.

      How is this different from the police raiding my home and stealing my written notes and papers? In communist China, this was a real concern, so much so that dissidents didn't write anything down if they could help it. The famous doctor and author of Chairman Mao's biography Li Zhisui (read this book - it's great) burned all his contemporary notes at the time, many many books worth of material, because he was so afraid of this.

      It's a great state of affairs when we can compare Britain 2004 with China in the '60s and '70s.

      Rich.

    16. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by hiroko · · Score: 1
      the FBI does make a reasonable attempt to not inconvenience you *too* horribly if they have to take your disks.

      Asides for the inconvienience of getting your disks back in a completely untrustable state, and having to rebuild everything.

      --
      Just because you can't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.
    17. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It seems hard for me to believe the claim that they've made "a reasonable attempt to not inconvenience you *too* horribly". The fact is, most previous historical captures in the past in the US by the Secret Service and the FBI have centered around the simple (collection just the computer) to the absurd (collect anything remotely electronic). Part of this was in the past, the Secret Service and FBI were utterly paranoid on the power of phreaks (the legend phreaks propagated probably didn't help matters much); taking away their computers, et al seemed the best method to stop them I guess. The other part is that they didn't want to risk possibly ignoring information that might turn up to their advantage.

      Ie, they were less going in to confirm suspicions of a crime and more fishing for any evidence they could gather, especially to the end of finding the plans/schemes in taking advantage of the phone system (and computer systems, later with hackers). The fact is, if the FBI was really only interested in having a copy of the information, as a source of evidence, they could either a) take a copy of the HD and give the original back to the owner or b) make a copy of the HD and leave it with the owner, while taking the original.

      The primary reasons they didn't/don't do this is because they see the information as a threat itself, and they're trying their best to prevent further dissementation of this information regardless of having actually proven guilt (it's a de facto indefinite injunction). To me, it seems pretty obvious that the FBI or police do not have a right to take things away from you and inhibit your use of them without first arresting you, trying you, and having you convicted of a crime. To that end, it seems abundantly clear that if the FBI or police wish to take something away from you as evidence, they either need to a) arrest you pre hence or post hence, then your goods will be returned to you when you're freed be it for lack of evidence, being found innocent, or after serving your term or b) if they don't arrest you, have the goods returned to you within 48hrs (the maximal period of time allowed before they have to bring you up for inditement) while in the meantime providing you with comparable goods to use. In the latter case, a comparable good would be a copy of the original HD.

      But, all in all, this is all talk about what should happen in the US. Seeing that the FBI was apparently involved somehow, these practices should play a role in their actions. And finally, these rules should apply throughout the US, as it's clearly outside the scope of the government to take goods indefinitely without paying you for said goods. The Constitution gives Eminent Domain powers. It doesn't give Eminent Indefinite Borrowing powers.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    18. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      You realize of course, that since you're not involved party, you probably just don't know all the facts. I don't think its any government policy anywhere to always comment on ongoing criminal investigations to the general public.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    19. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Yes. I know that I don't know all the facts. (In fact I stated so in the post that you are replying to.)

      But I don't *have* any other explanation that appears to me to be consistent with the known facts. Do you?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    20. Re:returning confiscated items is rare, isn't it? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > because they want evidence off of them, possibly just incidental.

      Good point. Perhaps a picture will be used to prove an accused person was present at a certain protest.

  9. Not exactly, but... by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...according to this and this, there was a request from the Italian and Swiss governments under a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty to the United States (since the hosting provider was a US company). The "FBI" did not physically "seize" the drives, since the FBI does not have jurisdiction in the UK, though it appears that Rackspace voluntarily responded to the US subpoena, which was generated as a matter of course under the MLA treaty.

    1. Re:Not exactly, but... by zurab · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The "FBI" did not physically "seize" the drives, since the FBI does not have jurisdiction in the UK, though it appears that Rackspace voluntarily responded to the US subpoena, which was generated as a matter of course under the MLA treaty.

      I don't get the logic in this. I have 2 particular issues:

      1. So what if Rackspace is a U.S. company? If they are doing business in the U.K. they have to obey the laws in that country. Why didn't Italian and Swiss law enforcement agencies contact their counterparts in the U.K. and other listed countries instead? I'm sure the British police could easily seize those hard drives under the British court order.

      What does the FBI have to do with this? Is it because the FBI has more pull now and it's easier to violate people's rights in the U.S. as long as you utter the word "terrorism" or am I overreacting?

      2. As I understand, whatever was on those hard drives belongs to Indymedia. So, doesn't the FBI need to serve the court order to Indymedia directly (instead of or in addition to Rackspace)? Imagine if you are leasing a car from your local dealership and police get a warrant to retrieve an audio/video CD that they believe you are keeping in your car. Can the police serve the warrant to the dealership and then help themselves to your car without letting you know? Wouldn't they have to serve you with the warrant?

      IANAL, are there any lawyers who can verify if these things are legal and if law enforcement does indeed possess such powers?
    2. Re:Not exactly, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their rights haven't been violated.

    3. Re:Not exactly, but... by daveschroeder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So what if Rackspace is a U.S. company? If they are doing business in the U.K. they have to obey the laws in that country. Why didn't Italian and Swiss law enforcement agencies contact their counterparts in the U.K. and other listed countries instead? I'm sure the British police could easily seize those hard drives under the British court order.

      I imagine that Rackspace was neither violating US nor UK law. I wouldn't be surprised if Italy and Switzerland also made the request directly to the UK, and the US ended up "winning the race", as it were. The FBI's statement indicates it was more or less facilitating the mechanics of an MLA treaty request, not doing anything proactive or investigative.

      What does the FBI have to do with this? Is it because the FBI has more pull now and it's easier to violate people's rights in the U.S. as long as you utter the word "terrorism" or am I overreacting?

      The "FBI" was involved because that is the federal law enforcement agency of record for an international MLA treaty request. Apparently the State Department was also involved. So that's why the "FBI" was involved. If you're asking the broader question of why the US in general was even involved, again, it was because Rackspace is a US company. Perhaps there was some sense of the US authorities having more "pull" over a US company, or the process happening more expeditiously since it was a US company; in any case, Rackspace chose to voluntarily cooperate with "international law enforcement authorities".

      As I understand, whatever was on those hard drives belongs to Indymedia. So, doesn't the FBI need to serve the court order to Indymedia directly (instead of or in addition to Rackspace)? Imagine if you are leasing a car from your local dealership and police get a warrant to retrieve an audio/video CD that they believe you are keeping in your car. Can the police serve the warrant to the dealership and then help themselves to your car without letting you know? Wouldn't they have to serve you with the warrant?

      I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm not sure about the mechanics of this. I'm not sure that the vehicle analogy is directly applicable to this situation as specific laws and precedent apply to vehicles; it may be that there are US legal or MLAT provisions that allow such seizures with a court order for the specific items, without the order needing to be presented to anyone in particular except those who are required to facilitate the seizure; I don't know.

    4. Re:Not exactly, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The harddrives are Rackspace property. Their clients (i.e. indymedia) only rents them. The situation is more like the cops serving your landlord a court order to let them into your apartmemt (which, AFAIK, they can do.)

    5. Re:Not exactly, but... by Ghostx13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a US company (or citizen) abroad, not only are you under the jurisdiction of the country you are in, but you are still subject to the laws of the US. I don't know if other countries do this.

      The data on the hard-drives DOES belong to indymedia. However, those drives are not owned by indymedia. As such the warrant is served to the owner of the drives. It's the same case in houses (and I believe from leased cars as well). If your not home and a police agency has a warrant for your apartment, they serve the apartment manager with the warrant. AFAIK, you don't even have to be made aware of the warrant.

    6. Re:Not exactly, but... by alex_tibbles · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the reason is the treaty that the US and the UK signed that means a very high level of co-operation and limits on the level of evidence required in order to extradite from the UK to the US. This agreement is probably more powerful than anything existing between the UK and Swiss govt (Switzerland is NOT in the EU remember) or even within the EU.

    7. Re:Not exactly, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a US company (or citizen) abroad, not only are you under the jurisdiction of the country you are in, but you are still subject to the laws of the US. I don't know if other countries do this.

      That would become very interesting (if the current UK government weren't trying to become the 51st state), when the manager of the local branch is arrested for espionage. The main company may be american, but those drives were certainly not.

      So, what happens, when the global manager gets told "hand over the drives to the FBI, or get arrested", the local manager gets told "do it, or you're fired", and also "if you do it, YOU get arrested"? "Following orders" does usually not excempt you from the law, with the possible exception of minor war crimes.

    8. Re:Not exactly, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, why didn't the FBI contack UK authorities, and get them to do the work?

      The manager who moved the drives out of the country should be charged with espionage or similar. The information on those drives were not his, and he did not have authority to give it to anyone, outside of a (UK) court order.

  10. Info on the Disks by essence · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder what was on the disks. I imagine the FBI could have gotten ip logs, password lists, email lists archives...there's a heap of things that could have been on there that points to names and addresses of people who the state would like to harrass..

    We all know that the current world order is tending towards fascism, this incident is just another step along that path.

    1. Re:Info on the Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apache on these boxes was set not to log any IP addresses in the access logs, see the discussions on the IMC Tech list if you want to know more about this.

      IMC techies are now going to have to analyse the disks to see what info the FBI will have got from this, probably just a few public keys... Of course the disks are not going to be put back into a production server etc...

    2. Re:Info on the Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the librertarians too.
      Apparently, it's the chickenshit conservative assfucks like you who don't realize this. Asshole.

    3. Re:Info on the Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for the disks weren't seized by the FBI. The the raid was performed by British authorities, as apparently requested by the Swiss authorities. The FBI were just along for the show.

    4. Re:Info on the Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is this just flat out nutty and tinfoil hat garbage insightful.

      people have gone so overboard lately, when there is a real invasion of privacy i bet their heads flat out explode.

    5. Re:Info on the Disks by Pete+(big-pete) · · Score: 1

      Apache on these boxes was set not to log any IP addresses in the access logs, see the discussions on the IMC Tech list if you want to know more about this.

      You can also see Yeb's comments (Yeb is Jebba, the guy associated with Indymedia who has the contract with Rackspace) on this exact issue in a slashdot comment he made once upon a time...

      -- Pete.

    6. Re:Info on the Disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets hope Rackspace recreates the site(s), puts in the biggest 400gig IDE drives, and using dd and and a RND salting, write stuff to each sector, possibly using Rubberhose.org on top.

      Tragically, the only reason for hardware confiscation, must be the police forensics lack the budget to buy their own storage - like sorry Bob, form 3C - your request for an extra 500gigs got rejected - the admin thinks you should use the communal burner - back it up to CD's. Quota increase request denied.

      Other Dilbert issues: Police union for OS&H reasons won't allow a noisy server to be set up in an open plan office, even if the teeny cubicle was big enough, and had a spare power point.

  11. About time by Cerebron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The FBI loves intimidation, and it appears that is what happened here too. I wish the FBI would offer apologies and make some sort of serious restitution every time they confiscate stuff and then realize they don't want to prosecute. They need some sort of penalty for raids that prove unwarranted. It is a form of terrorism, I think. "If you run afoul of us, even maybe violate copyrights, we will raid your house, and take your stuff."

    --
    xyzzy - operation overload.
    1. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they wouldn't be the FBI. They are not the Girl Scouts and you are right, they do love intimidation. It's an important tool.

    2. Re:About time by 6.023e23 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      However, the FBI appears to be acting mainly as a mediary in this case, principally because the ISP hosting the hardware is an American company and therefore is more under American jurisdiction that British, Italian, Swiss, or any other jurisdiction. Whatever qualms may be had with the FBI, their involvement I believe likely simplified matters for Rackspace at least by providing a familiar law enforcement interface (as opposed to Rackspace having to deal directly with one or more sets of European law enforcement agencies).

    3. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's exactly what the administration wanted it to look like. This had as much to do with Swiss undercover narcs as LISP with web design.

    4. Re:About time by Cerebron · · Score: 0

      Hey, why do I modded as a troll, and the FUCK BUSH! gets an informative?

      --
      xyzzy - operation overload.
    5. Re:About time by Cerebron · · Score: 1

      heh, *now* I get modded up...

      --
      xyzzy - operation overload.
  12. linebreak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i've never seen a linebreak in a story in the blurb that appears on the front page.

    blows my mind

  13. For more background info see the sysadmin's blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Jebba, the guy with the contract with Rackspace has a load more info about this whole affair in his blog.

  14. Remember on Nov. 2nd by vegetablespork · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If this had been your site, there probably would have been no media outcry. Your site would still be down, and your drives in an evidence locker with no likelihood of return. When people say "Free speech has consequences," this is the kind of thing they're talking about. Cast a vote against the Ashcroft administration and send a check to the EFF.

    --

    Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

    1. Re:Remember on Nov. 2nd by BurritoWarrior · · Score: 1

      What happens in Switzerland on November 2nd?

      Some kinda big cheese fest or sumfin?

    2. Re:Remember on Nov. 2nd by AoT · · Score: 1

      I'd guess that a lot of finger crossing and praying will happen on Nov. 2nd.

  15. Justice System?! by orangeguru · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What kind of Justice System raids people property and keeps silent?! I can hardly imagine that the indy-servers are a threat to anyones national security? Whatever happend to the freedom of expression or the freedom of the press?!

    1. Re:Justice System?! by 6.023e23 · · Score: 3, Informative

      A) Freedom of the press is a more predominant issue in the US than in Europe. The press has very different rights in Europe than in the US. B) If the FBI was indeed acting as a go-between in this case, your beef should be more with the originators of the seizure order than the FBI. C) If indeed undercover officers or other covert LEOs were potentially exposed, the general position, IMO, is that the freedom of the press takes somewhat of a back seat to maintaining the security of those individuals and the operations to which they are attached.

    2. Re:Justice System?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our president's motto seems to be "Fuck Europe" in every other case (environment, tariffs, decriminalization of narcotics, &c.) as well as being expressed in his demeanor. However, when it's just a case of infringing someone's civil liberties to garner some cred, it's apparently all right.

      Why should I NOT object, in principle, to a bureau of my Federal government acting as another country's police? We go to hell and back just to spit in the face of the UN, and look at this!What's amusing is likely not a small number of people who are staunchly anti-UN and yet see no problem with this FBI action. To those people: get a clue. You're not a whole lot better off with a world police force in the name of your government, than you are with any other.

      Yes, I understand that W himself probably didn't issue this, but it is his Administration in power at the moment. Really, the issue isn't dependent on the Republicans. It could every bit as easily have happened under a Dem. What is significant is: no matter who is in power, while the government will happily squash any other issue at a whim, your American rights are just a low-valued trading chip.

    3. Re:Justice System?! by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. Our justice system should respect the rights guaranteed under our justice system.

      Acting as a go-between is no excuse for violating the rights under our justice system. Come up with something else.

      The amendments were added after the main body of the constitution, and therfore override the original. If the main body says that treaties are the supreme law of the land, and the amendment says that Freedom of Speech shall be protected, then freedom of speech is to be protected over and above international treaties. An amendment takes precedence over the original statement, like a bug patch takes precedence over the original bug.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    4. Re:Justice System?! by psavo · · Score: 1

      Well, for instance if somebody at indymedia would be suspected of active pedophilia, it really wouldn't be nice for anybody if they shouted aloud: 'Yeah, we caught this pedophile in indymedia'.

      Especially if this (hypothetical) suspicion turned groundless.

      --
      fucktard is a tenderhearted description
    5. Re:Justice System?! by KjetilK · · Score: 1

      A) Freedom of the press is a more predominant issue in the US than in Europe.

      The Press Freedom Barometer is a good source of information on this topic, and press freedom in general. Note that many countries in Europe has a "good situation" whereas the US has just a "satisfactory situation".

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  16. Silly Hosting Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This posting seems rather silly. The FBI never seized the hard drives to begin with, but accompanied the British authorities on the raid to sieze the drives, apparently to be passed onto to Swiss authorities.

    And second of all, why was IndyMedia waiting for the return of the drives before restoring sites? Didn't they have backups? Now they make a big deal about how they are treating the drives as "compromised". Whey they didn't just buy new drives the day of raid, and restore the backup? Clearly, they don't have a backup, because now they have to do a selective copy of sites from "compromised" disks onto presumable new disks.

    1. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are backups, but they are not 100% complete as you would expect when the backup is an rsynced db dump done via cron every 24 hours...

    2. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And second of all, why was IndyMedia waiting for the return of the drives before restoring sites? Didn't they have backups?

      A lot of IMCs are run on shoestring, if any, budgets by volunteers who aren't exactly well-off. Hosting and bandwidth aren't cheap, and I think it's likely the people handling Ahimsa didn't even have empty drives available to restore to, never mind back up to.

      --

      Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
    3. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Ravenscall · · Score: 1

      You say this like Indymedia has wads of cash just laying around to buy redundant hardware.

      --
      You say you want a revolution....
    4. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      There are backups, but they are not 100% complete as you would expect when the backup is an rsynced db dump done via cron every 24 hours...

      Isn't Linus against using dump for backups? In fact, what O/S is Indymedia server running?

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    5. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Yeb · · Score: 4, Informative
      Ok AC, you said:
      The FBI never seized the hard drives to begin with, but accompanied the British authorities on the raid to seize the drives

      How do you know this? You don't. The various Brit cops that have been contacted have either said "no comment" or "we weren't there". We HAVE NO IDEA WHICH GOVERNMENT'S AGENTS WERE THERE. Oh, I'm sorry, I must be shouting this because I'm saying it over & over...

      AC says:
      why was IndyMedia waiting for the return of the drives before restoring sites?

      Um, have you been to http://www.indymedia.org lately? http://uk.indymedia.org or a whole ton of other sites that were hosted on AHIMSA but are up & running? They were back online very quickly. How fast would slashdot come back online if the gubmint stole their kit?

      There were backups of most things, but not of everything. Each indy was responsible for their own backups & some were better at it or had more resources than others. Some sites had newer software that allowed for easier mirroring, for others it's way more messy.

      Sorry if I'm sounding a bit edgy here... :)

      -Jeff

    6. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Yeb · · Score: 1
      Bull999999 asked:
      what O/S is Indymedia server running?

      Indymedia runs for the most part on Linux, although there is some FreeBSD and OpenBSD scattered here and there. There is not a single windoz box hosting anything.

      There are a variety of distros used, the main preference appears to be debian, but AHIMSA was running redhat.

      -Jeff

    7. Re:Silly Hosting Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm. Managed backup is extra..and a lot extra.
      And when you send in a HD to mirror existing
      data you are given a hard time and must schedule
      a maintenance.
      If you knew WTF you were talking about rackspace wise you wouldn't even spout off.

  17. FBI needs more funding, possibly? by Infinityis · · Score: 0

    Geez, if the FBI needed more hard drive space, they could have just asked Bush to raise taxes a penny or two. Goodness knows storage space is cheap enough nowdays...

  18. The NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    probably haxxor3d the BIOS. Sam Fisher is one l33t mutherfucker. Format all you want, sweetie. Your tight little backdoor is [i]ours[/i].

    Fucking liberals...

  19. Rackspace offices dialog by suso · · Score: 4, Funny

    FBI: Bend over
    Rackspace: *whimper* ok...

    1. Re:Rackspace offices dialog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The raid was execute by British authorities, not be the FBI. The FBI was along for the ride because Rackspace is a US company, and no doubt the British authorities didn't want to piss off the US, by not including them. The raid was legally request a third-party, not the US or the UK.

      So, all of this FBI and US bashing is misplaced. It is possible that the UK Home Office overstepped their authorities in the raid though.

    2. Re:Rackspace offices dialog by suso · · Score: 1

      US, UK, Sweden, Swiss... same difference.

      Actually, my first comment was not meant to be funny, it was meant to poke fun of rackspace for giving in to these blagrant attempts to steal away what are expected to be personal freedoms.

      IMHO, Rackspace just lost the right to complain about these civil abuses going on in the world. If more people would stand up to them, they would happen less.

    3. Re:Rackspace offices dialog by berbo · · Score: 1
      From the Argentina site (RTFM):
      con amigos con rackspack...
      quien necesita enemigos???

      [tr: With friends like Rackspace, who needs enemies?]


      rackspace, no te bajes los pantalones tan rápido.... protegé a tus clientes un poquito.

      [tr: rackspace: don't drop your pants so fast ... protect your clients a little]

  20. Fastest FBI Return of all time? by graveyardduckx · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Is it just me, or is this the fastest turn around from the FBI of all time? I remember past articles about hardware being gone for YEARS at a time. It seems like the article about their equipment being seized was posted only a week or so ago. Did they really do an investigation or were the just attempting to scare everyone?

  21. Translated from the site by Lisandro · · Score: 4, Informative

    Translated (roughly, so pardon any mistakes) from the News section of the Indymedia homepage:

    "In the morning of Thursday 7 of October, American autorities delivered a federal order to Rackspace (Indymedias' provider, with offices in London and USA), requiring the surrender off Indymedias' web servers to the demmanding agency. According to what was said to Indymedia volunteers, Rackspace stated that "they couldn't give Indymedia more information respecting the order". ISPs have received orders to stand quiet in similar situtations in which orders were given not to keep the involved parts informed on what was going on.

    Indymedia has not clear how and why a server outside American jurisdiction no can be requised by American autorithies.

    At the same time, an aditional server was disconnected at Rackspace; that server provided streaming radio for some emitters, BLAG (linux distribution), and quite a few more sites.

    In the last months numerous attacks to independant media have been seen being perpetrated by the USA federal government. In August, the secret service used a jurisdictional requirement in an attempt to disband New Yorks' CMI before the RNC, attempting to obtain IP registers in USA and Holland. The past month the FCC dismantled several American radio emtitters. Two weeks earlier the FBI requested that Indymedia deleted a story on the Nantes CMI who had the picture of some Swedish secret police officer and CMI volunteers were visited by the FBI to inquire on the same issue. Meanwhile, Indymedia and other organizations had success with their victories against, f.ex., Diebold and the Patriot Act. Today, nevertheless, American authorities have disconnected CMIs all oer the world.

    The list of affected CMIs include:
    Italy, Brasil, Uruguay, England, Andorra, Polonia, Western Massachusetts, Nice, Nantes, Lilles, Marseille , Euskal Herria (País vasco), Liege, East and West Vlaanderen, Antwerpen Belgrado, Portugal, Praga, Galicia..."

    1. Re:Translated from the site by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      "Indymedia has not clear how and why a server outside American jurisdiction no can be requised by American autorithies."

      Sorry, make that: "Indymedia can't understand how and why a server outside American jurisdiction can be requised by American autorithies.". I need more caffeine.

  22. Re:Silly Hosting Company-ignore this gangster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This post is obviosly by a gangster.
    we are not all sheeple.

  23. EFF's press release on the subject... by stinkfoot · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2004_10.php#00200 6

    Indymedia Servers Mysteriously Reappear, But Questions Remain

    San Francisco, CA - Rackspace Managed Hosting, the San Antonio-based company that manages two Indymedia servers seized by the US government last Thursday, said yesterday that the servers have been returned and are now available to go back online. Immediate access to the servers, which host Indymedia's Internet radio station and more than 20 Indymedia websites, will be delayed so that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) can ensure that the servers are secure and take steps to preserve evidence for future legal action.

    Now that the servers have been returned, the question still remains: who took them, and under what authority? Citing a gag order, Rackspace would not comment on what had happened both in the original seizure of the servers or their return. All that is known at this point is that the subpoena that resulted in the seizure was issued at the request of a foreign government, most likely with the assistance of the United States Attorney's Office in San Antonio. Although initial reports suggested that the FBI had taken the servers, the FBI has now denied any involvement.

    The seizure, which silenced numerous political news websites for several days, is clearly a violation of the First Amendment. "Secret orders silencing US media should be beyond the realm of possibility in a country that believes in freedom of speech," said EFF staff attorney Kurt Opsahl. "EFF was founded with the Steve Jackson Games case fourteen years ago, and at that time we established that seizing entire servers because of a claim about some pieces of information on them is blatantly illegal and improper. It appears the government forgot this basic rule, and we will need to remind them."

    EFF will take legal action to find out what really happened to Indymedia's servers and ensure that Internet media are protected from egregious First Amendment violations like this in the future.

  24. bush is a closet liberal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no self respecting american republican would condone drug use by his children.

    1. Re:bush is a closet liberal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No self respecting republican would condone homosexualtiy by his children, either, but apparently our VP will make this one exception for his own.

      Interesting how ideas change when it's not somebody else's problem...

  25. Goatsed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's Ron Jeremy, seeing goatse for the first time: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tongodeon/153038. html

    1. Re:Goatsed... by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

      You mean seeing it for the first time from a first-person perspective, right?

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  26. No, if they wanted infroation like that by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indymedia wouldn't know. They'd obtain a wiretap warrant, and then tap what they wanted (be it a keyboard, the network connection, etc). Works just like a phone tap in that the party being tapped never knows about it. That's the idea, really. You want them going about their normal bussiness, unaware they are being watched so you can catch them doing something illegal. If they susprect you are watching them, it doesn't do much good. A mobster isn't going to call in a hit on someone on a phone they suspect to be tapped.

    It would seem that what they wanted was the data on the disks. I'm not saying they shouldn't give it a once over but really, if that was the case, it would be done in secret. They don't raid the house of a mafia member, take all their phones, and then hand them back a couple days later with bugs in them. They stick a bug on the line when no one is looking.

    1. Re:No, if they wanted infroation like that by Zarquon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The only advantage I see to an internal datalogger is you can grab it after the SSL layer decrypts it. If you have adequate encryption, a wiretap is only going to yield traffic analysis, not the full communication.

      --
      "'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
  27. This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And will probabably be modded down... so I dont care...

    But the more I read about stuff like this, the more that I realise that we need to change the way our governments operate. They have TOO much power, and the do things that sould be illegal under the guise of saftey

    I truely think that there needs to be a shift in world power, I think that if given enough room to breathe people would make the right decision, and if we (americans) would quit putting our nose where it doesn't belong, that 9/11 would not have happened.

    1. Re:This is a pointless post. by lewko · · Score: 1
      and if we (americans) would quit putting our nose where it doesn't belong, that 9/11 would not have happened.


      Are you really that naive to absolve Miliant Islam and believe the US should feel guilty for 9/11 instead?

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    2. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you so blind as so not to be able to see that the US actions overseas have an effect on people?

      While what happened on 9/11 was wrong, the USA does need to take some of the blame (not all), and release it is not liked (for some it is legit, for some its just jelously) and work on the legit complants, or face more such acts.

      Not that even then acts like 9/11 will stop.

    3. Re:This is a pointless post. by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I could never in good concience blame americans for 911. It was a horrid horrid tragedy.

      But militant movements dont evolve in a vacuum. We need to ask "What happened, by whom, how and when that caused these people to want us harm?". I mean, why the US/allies and not , say, china.

      And that is what has not been asked. And THAT is the danger.

      Unfortunately we do know the source of the frusturations.... foreign interference. If your neighbor came over and kept punching you everyime you had a fight with your partner or something , you might just feel compelled to go and smash his windows in with a brick after a while.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    4. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really that naive to absolve Miliant Islam and believe the US should feel guilty for 9/11 instead?

      I am not absolving them of fault, Though I do feal it is more or less "payback" for things that we (americans) have done in the past.

      Let me ask you this question.

      Where did Miliant Islam come from?

      http://personal.ashland.edu/~jlewis8/Terror%20Chro nology.htmTake a look here and that may help you to understand where I am comming from, and why the hatred abounds for the "westerners" in the middle east.

    5. Re:This is a pointless post. by burns210 · · Score: 1

      It appears that they are acting on the powers given to them by the Patriot Act. Revoke that, or atleast the parts giving agencies no need of judicial oversight(used in 'suspected' terrorists), etc. But then again, they are under a gag order...

    6. Re:This is a pointless post. by Draknor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, let's see.. who sponsored the training of Osama bin Laden decades ago? Who turned Afghanistan into a battle ground between "the good guys" and "the communists"?

      Islamic militants may be to blame for 9/11, but US foreign policy deserves a lot of blame for creating the islamic militants to begin with. Or, at the very least, for fanning the flames of their hatred.

    7. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kicker being 911 was inside just so they can take away such rights .. can't you guys see it yet? sheesh...

    8. Re:This is a pointless post. by cookiepus · · Score: 1

      Well this is the first time I saw a post modded up so high because it's subject line is correct.

      But, which part of what happened do you object to them most?

      Cooperation between American and European law enforcement?

      Or the giving back of the hardware?

      What outrages you so?

    9. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can I put this, Ummm to blatantly answer you question, The fact that "they" are allowed to take * from your home/busniess/* , just because they suspect that you have some form of terrorist involvement, is what "outrages" me.

      Those who willingly give up freedom for the sake of saftey, deserve niether.

      or maybe it is the fact that if they wanted to they could take you, cookiepus, all of your belongings, squash you like a bug, and there would be nothing that you could do about it, what about that doesn't outrage you?

      Just because the government/media labels someone a murder/badguy. Does not make it true, you can believe what you want, that is the good thing, but to blindly close your eyes to what is truely happening around you, that is what "they" want.

      Just follow like a sheep. go where ever they lead you. If that is how anybody chooses to live thier life more power to them. I am not here to judge.

    10. Re:This is a pointless post. by lewko · · Score: 1

      Really?

      Then why haven't the Native Americans blown up buildings? Why haven't the Tibetans cut anyone's head off?

      Maybe because the 'hatred' has nothing to do with oppression and everything to do with a death-cult.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    11. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Then why haven't the Native Americans blown up buildings?"

      Because they are too busy running casinos! DUH!

    12. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because after you kill 9 out of 10 native americans, take their kids away to be raised by white people, and take their land and all their possessions, it really takes the fight out of a person.

      Don't worry, we are well on our way to "subjugating" the middle east. After all, it is our white man's burden.

    13. Re:This is a pointless post. by vidarh · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Your logic is invalid. That some groups of people haven't resorted to violence as a result of being subjected to violence and oppression doesn't mean that other groups won't.

      In any case, the most important issue is that US foreign policy is creating excuses. If someone wants to carry out a terrorist attack and needs to attract volunteers to carry out the attacks, it's a damn lot easier when the country is widely despised for it's support someone most of your target audience considers enemies.

      THAT is what the US should be really worried about - each time a civilian is killed by US troops, no matter how much it's an accident or no matter whether it was an unfortunate result of a fully justified operation, someone out there will hate the US more. Some of them will be easy prey for fanatical terror groups. Some of them will go on to recruit and conduct propaganda for such groups themselves. The same happens each time the US veto's a UN resolution condemning Israel, or in other ways does anything that is seen by huge groups of people as interfering with their lives and supporting oppression.

      These groups would have a vastly harder time recruiting anyone if the US focused more on being seen as fair and balanced and respectful of cultural and religious differences, and less on military superiority.

    14. Re:This is a pointless post. by Redchrome · · Score: 1
      But the more I read about stuff like this, the more that I realise that we need to change the way our governments operate. They have TOO much power, and the do things that sould be illegal under the guise of saftey

      As Davy Crockett said, any government that is powerful enough to give you what you want, is powerful enough to take away what you have. This is why I vote Libertarian. Keep the government small, so it doesn't have enough power to mess up the lives of everyone it touches. Let power return to the people by cutting government's role in regulating our lives, and removing the government protections that corporations have. (Protections like the right to pollute, so long as they get approval to do so from the EPA; and no liability for executives when the company harms people while under their guidance).

      Look at the Bill of Rights sometime. It doesn't say "the people have the right to.."; it says things like "Congress shall make no law...". The Constitution of the United States was designed to be a limit on the power of the federal government; not an enumeration of the rights you have. The current U.S. government is way out of control, because it's slipped its Constitutional chains, and is trampling all over the limits that are supposed to be placed on it.

    15. Re:This is a pointless post. by los_mooses · · Score: 1

      "Then why haven't the Native Americans blown up buildings?" Well isn't Leonard Peltier still in the jail. So I think that Native Indians do fight back against foreign oppression. "haven't the Tibetans cut anyone's head off?" Maybe they don't want any religious groups (Dalai Lama) to be in charge of their politics.

    16. Re:This is a pointless post. by lewko · · Score: 1

      Why should the US, or anyone else feel guilty for being seen as an "excuse" for the inexcusable?

      There is no excuse ever to justify the deliberate and strategic killing of non-combatants, civilians and children, A.K.A Terrorism. Many have tried to justify it, or explain it but the fact is it is abhorrent and no one should feel like they deserved it because they simply didn't. THAT'S an excuse because it's far easier for the left to blame the US or any other life-loving democracy than tackle the real issues of Militant Islamic terrorism.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    17. Re:This is a pointless post. by vidarh · · Score: 1
      You miss the point. It's not about feeling guilty. It's about whether or not there are people out there who will see the US as acceptable targets and as a result decides to volunteer for terrorist operations.

      US foreign policy is sufficiently divisive to allow terrorist organisations to capitalize on the hatred it evokes and used US actions as a way of getting people to volunteer.

      No matter how abhorrent it is, the US needs to face facts: The US is a target of terror because it maintains a foreign policy that incite hatred in large groups of people, to the point where not only Islamic fundamentalists but even non-muslims all over the world get disgusted.

      Fix the US foreign policy and the vast majority of recruits to terrorist organisations that wants to target the US will disappear, because the excuses they use to justify their decisions have disappeared and exposed them for what they are.

      That IS the real issue of militant Islamic terrorism. Take away their excuses, and you've cut off their air supply. As a side effect perhaps the US would actually be respected again.

    18. Re:This is a pointless post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take away their excuses, and you've cut off their air supply

      Unless their excuse is fundamental Islamist Fascism which mandates that they should continue to wage Jihad until eventually all non-Muslims convert or die.

      How do you propose to remove that excuse?

      Oh never mind... Too hard! Easier to blame the US right?

    19. Re:This is a pointless post. by vidarh · · Score: 1
      That isn't an excuse. It is a reality that doesn't attract many people, because it is contrary to most musmlims interpretations of Islam.

      If using the Quaran was a sufficient excuse to get the attention and support the terrorist organisations wanted, they would have no need to use the US as an excuse in all their propaganda. Hatred only "works" if it has a target that people dislike.

      It's not about blaming the US, but about stating the reality of why the US is facing decades of war unless it addresses the reasons why these organisations can get money and people so easily: Millions of people hate the US for it's agressive foreign policy. Some of them enough to risk dying for it.

  28. Article translation from Indymedia website by a.different.perspect · · Score: 1, Informative

    It's only rough, so sorry for any mistakes.

    "On the morning of Thursday the 7th of October, U.S. authorities delivered a federal order to Rackspace (Indymedia's provider, whose offices are in London and USA), requiring the surrender of Indymedias' web servers to the demanding agency. According to what was said to Indymedia volunteers, Rackspace stated that "they couldn't give Indymedia more information respecting the order." ISPs have received orders to stand quiet in similar situtations in which orders were given not to keep the involved parts informed on what was going on.

    Indymedia has not been clear as to how and why a server outside American jurisdiction can be requested by American authorities.

    At the same time, an additional server was disconnected at Rackspace; that server provided streaming radio for some emitters, BLAG (a Linux distribution), and quite a few more sites.

    In the last months numerous attacks to independant media have been seen being perpetrated by the U.S. federal government. In August, the secret service used a jurisdictional requirement in an attempt to disband New York's CMI before the RNC, attempting to obtain IP registers in USA and Holland. The past month the FCC dismantled several American radio emtitters. Two weeks earlier the FBI requested that Indymedia delete a story on the Nantes CMI who had the picture of some Swedish secret police officer and CMI volunteers were visited by the FBI to inquire on the same issue. Meanwhile, Indymedia and other organizations had success with their victories against FedEx, Diebold and the Patriot Act. Today, nevertheless, American authorities have disconnected CMIs all over the globe.

    The list of affected CMIs include: Italy, Brasil, Uruguay, England, Andorra, Polonia, Western Massachusetts, Nice, Nantes, Lilles, Marseille , Euskal Herria (País vasco), Liege, East and West Vlaanderen, Antwerpen Belgrado, Portugal, Praga and Galicia"

  29. Re:Artificial Intelligence.... by ElDuderino44137 · · Score: 1

    Modded ...
    Offtopic ...
    Lame ...

  30. floridians are retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So are texans, i've lived here 20 years so i know.
    also, the whole of the u.s.a. are stupid, why? because our military figured out a way to influence our children through ritalin and our adults through prozac.

  31. Replace Everything.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just the computer?
    Think about it, if the FBI had time to look at the computers that would analyze them for already exsiting exploits and security holes. If they use the same OS, same server software, the FBI will be waiting to hack them. Why do you think it's not that common that FBI hardware/software is found on computers? Because they use known mean to exploit software so the Admin can't tell the difference between them and some other hacker.

  32. I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by bstadil · · Score: 5, Informative
    I am spending my Slashdot Karma just to be able to voice my anger at this administration.

    They have made a pigs breakfast at everything from The economy, environment, egual rights, Civil Liberties.

    Not one fucking thing have they managed to succed in. Not ONE.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  33. Re:Artificial Intelligence.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF are you talking about???

  34. On leaking the identity of secret agents. by jbn-o · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From what I've read, yes, it's a crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. But the current administration doesn't appear to be doing much to track down who first leaked Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA secret agent. Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife was exposed by columnist Robert Novak when Novak wrote:

    "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate" the allegation.

    To quell the knee-jerk duopoly partisans: I'm not saying a Kerry administration would do better here. I have no idea what a Kerry administration would do about this. Speaking out against the actions of one party or one administration is not implicit support for any other party or independent candidate.

    1. Re:On leaking the identity of secret agents. by waynelorentz · · Score: 1

      But the current administration doesn't appear to be doing much to track down who first leaked Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA secret agent.

      Not much? I thought I recalled that a couple of weeks ago there were congressional hearings on it, and a federal investigation led by US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.

      Just because you haven't been keeping up on the case doesn't mean nothing's happening.

  35. Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by FsG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I'd like to know is why Indymedia still trusts Rackspace with its hosting. If my colo was refusing to tell me what's going on in a situation like this, I would think about moving my servers elsewhere, preferably overseas. I realize Rackspace is probably under a gag order, but frankly that wouldn't make me feel much better.

    --
    I made a PHP/MySQL library that prevents SQL injection & makes coding easier!
    1. Re:Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by 6.023e23 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It wouldn't? I would think that knowing that your provider is a law-abiding organization (whether or not you agree with the particular law is another issue) should make you feel better. What's Rackspace supposed to do? Refuse to comply because they don't agree with the FBI/Swiss/Italians/whoever or think Indymedia is a really cool organization that shouldn't be interfered with? That does them no good. Rackspace did the only thing they could do - they complied with (what appears to be) a legitimate law enforcement seizure request and gag order.
      As a customer of several colocation providers, I for one could not see any reason to hold Rackspace in any shadowed view for doing what they did. I _would_ look askance at them if they were to have violated the gag order or otherwise compromised the situation.
      Whether or not you agree with the situation is irrelevant. What's relevant in evaluating Rackspace's response is the level of professionalism with which they conducted themselves in the midst of what was and is not a comfortable situation.

    2. Re:Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why do you say it appears to be a legitimate gag order? Do you have ANY evidence except that RackSpace said so? Did they file any legal protest? If so, where can I find record of it?

      I have sympathy for RackSpace, and realize that this put them in a tough spot. But the fact remains that as far as we can tell they just rolled over, and didn't do anything to even try to protect their customer's privacy. Something to consider when next you are looking for a host.

      You rate your business the way you rate yours. (I notice, however, that you didn't name it.) Possibly if they were one of several different colocation providers that I used, I'd still trust them to maintain a mirror. If they were 10% cheaper than the competition. For a primary host they'd need to be 30-40% cheaper. (I haven't decided yet...much information about this is still missing, so even that's a rough estimate.)

      I don't consider laws to me more important than ethics or morals. Laws have become what one obeys because it's too dangerous to do otherwise. Morals and ethics are what one does because it's proper. Laws seem to rarely have anything to do with morals or ethics any more.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just have to say you are a whiny bitch. That why I returned my iMac is the worst bit of trash I have read since the last Eugenia Loli-Query linux review. WAAAAAAAAH. You talk about all of this pay software you had on Windows and expect Mac to give it all to you for free? You have shitty hardware that won't work, read the docs? You use a totally obscure browser and some popup blocker and bitch about that too? Can people handle being around you?

    4. Re:Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by 6.023e23 · · Score: 1
      Why do you say it ISN'T a legitimate order? Do you have any evidence that the executors of the order falsified the order or any reason that Rackspace should believe so? Should it be the position of any recipient of a legal order to assume impropriety unless proven otherwise?

      Let's be practical for a moment and put aside all the "we don't trust the government, down with the administration" rhetoric. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you on those particular points, but they are not the focus of this thread.) Rackspace is not an activist organization (and I do not use that word with the negative connotations that I've heard it used by the current US administration) that is going to base its determination of whether or not to comply with an order presented to it by a law enforcement agency on whether they agree with the reasons why the order is being presented, or whether they think their client is being persecuted. They have an obligation to abide by the law. They are not going to stick their corporate neck out and risk being made party to a legal issue with a client for failure to comply or obstruction. Doing so would make no sense.

      What about their customer's privacy are they supposed to have protected and didn't? What steps do you believe Rackspace, as a law-abiding and responsible company, should have taken that they didn't? What hosting companies do you feel/know would have acted differently?

      Do I agree with the Indymedia action? I don't have enough knowledge to make a judgement either way. I don't know anything about Indymedia or the reasons behind the seizure. Perhaps I may even agree with those who say it was a political move to stifle anti-administration sentiments, if facts supporting such a position come to light. However, for this particular thread, IMO, that is all irrelevant. What is relevant is that a US law enforcement agency presented a US company with an order to seize assets of one of its customers and to not disclose any information they were made privy to as part of complying with that order. Is that an unreasonable order? Should anyone expect a provider in such a case to refuse to comply with such an order? Should a customer expect a hosting provider to break the law for its benefit (and to the detriment of the hosting provider itself)?

      What would happen if Rackspace did as you and others suggested and decided to refuse to comply? Well, what's likely to have happened if the seizure of materials was sufficiently urgent is the law enforcement officers on the scene would have been empowered to immediately detain any individuals who impeded their seizure and procede to enforce the seizure anyway. Then, those individuals would be brought up on charges. Further, Rackspace would likely be brought up on charges as a company. Even if Rackspace had the luxury of simply refusing to comply and, as you suggested, filed legal protests, what would that have accomplished? How would that benefit Rackspace or any of their customers? How would that be seen as a reasonable business action?

      To the best of my knowledge, nobody who has posted to this thread has any information as to why the seizure was ordered. Plenty of people have speculations, but those speculations are just that. But you expect a hosting provider to share your speculations and convictions and to believe that refusing to comply with a seizure order is going to have a positive impact - that it's position as provider allows it to or mandates that it should/must uphold its personal/corporate convictions in deciding to not abide by the law.

      Let's suppose for a moment that all the proponents who argue that this was a heavy-handed action by the US administration to silence Indymedia are wrong. What if the seizure involved terrorist information, or child pornography, or as some have speculated protecting the identities of undercover operatives? Would you be directing so much ire at Rackspace for complying with the FBI then? The question of whether or not Rackspace acted appropriately is separate fr

    5. Re:Can they trust Rackspace anymore? by KjetilK · · Score: 1

      Refuse to comply because they don't agree with the FBI/Swiss/Italians/whoever or think Indymedia is a really cool organization that shouldn't be interfered with?

      That would have been fanatical support, now, wouldn't it?

      Indymedia should sue for false advertising... ;-)

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  36. Scary by PktLoss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My understanding from the original article is that a court order was presented in the US to an international firm, which then complied and turned over servers in another country, to officials in that country.

    Does this scare anyone else?

    Could firms use this precident setting situation & other crazy recent laws (DMCA for example) to force hosting companies to turn over servers located in other countries?

    Wasn't there a law passed not too long ago that gave the government the power to request information contained within many types of corporate databases (banking, insurance, car loan, etc)? Leverage that law with this case, and the current level of internationalization of many firms, and the government can get information about anyone, from just about anywhere.

    Or perhapps I am wearing the tinfoil hat too tightly...

    1. Re:Scary by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is scary. Imagine that hte FBI wanted to shut you up. It couldn't do so following US laws, so it works out an agreement with the Swiss to invoke some international treaty to allow them to shut you up. (In return we could provide the same service to them). Replace swiss with whatever country has 1st/4th ammendment like complications.

    2. Re:Scary by DavidTC · · Score: 5, Informative
      And anyone who thinks that's paranoid, remember that, from what we can piece together about it, is exactly how Echelon operates. The US intelligent community gets other governments to spy on Americans, because they, themselves, are forbidden from doing it. And they collect the data.

      In return, we spy on Canada's, England's, Australia, and New Zealand's citizens, and turn the information over to them.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    3. Re:Scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they don't just do this with server seizure proceedings -

      Say they think you have some information they want, but you don't know shit and thus cant tell them?

      Simple! Arrange with a friendly foreign government (let's say, for example, Syria) to dump you over there where you can be tortured at their convenience without interference from liberal journalists and activists.

      sound far-fetched? have a look here. Given I'm posting on YRO, I imagine most of you know all about this, but a lesson worth repeating..

    4. Re:Scary by Vip · · Score: 1

      And then you get this:

      Maher Arar sent to Syria

      Note how the authorities go on a finger pointing spree.

      Vip

    5. Re:Scary by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we've started doing it with more than data. Like people.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  37. A little ambigious.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was he tricked into viewing, or posing?

  38. Why would I do that? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    This happened in The United Kingdom, and at the request of another European nation. The FBI participated only as a formality, they do in all cases of US companies on foreign soil when it's requested.

    Seems to me that if there is anything that needs protesting it's Interpol and the treaties that allow such a thing to exist whereby one nation can get a court order to get things in another nation from a company of a third nation. That is, if you think that sort of thing is bad.

    There are plenty of arguments against Ashcroft, this isn't one of them. This is the FBI doing diplomatic legwork in response to a foreign request. This isn't new, it just usually doesn't make the news. Law enforcement in many nations cooperates quite tightly. Have a look at Interpol (www.interpol.int). It's largely based in Europe, but exists all over the globe to foster the cooperation of police forces across national boundries.

    1. Re:Why would I do that? by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

      Even if this work were at the behest of a foreign power, it has grave First Amendment implications. Anyhoo, I think the whole "foreign government request' was a convenient smokescreen for a takedown of what's been a problematic source of information/propaganda during the runup to the election. Once the adminstration saw that Indymedia would be defended, it backed off.

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

    2. Re:Why would I do that? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, there would be no first ammendment impications. The UK doesn't repsect the US constution. It's a sovering nation. The US didn't request the seizure or do the seizing, the FBI was just there as a treaty formality. It's basically in place so that if a foriegn bussiness somewhere is subject to something in their host country, they have agents there from their own police force that can explain thing to them and deal with them. If an ATi office in the US were to be raided by the FBI, the RCMP would be along for that reason, not to do the raiding, but for diplomatic reasons.

      It has the side effect of helping make sure that Rackspace had their rights in the UK respected. The FBI was observing and documenting everything so had the British authorities crossed the line, they could have reported it to the US consul to try and get something done.

      The alternative would be for the FBI to just stand aside, which would be seen as a slight by the UK, and let this all happen anyways.

    3. Re:Why would I do that? by AoT · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter if the UK doesn't respect the US constitution. The first amendment says:

      "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

      Nowhere in there does it say that it is permissible to make laws which prohibit the free speech of *anyone*, regardless of geographic location. Therefore, any law passed which allows the FBI to cooperate with foreign governments in an attack against free speech is not only a betrayal of the values of the US, it is also unconstitutional.

    4. Re:Why would I do that? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      No, notice the statement "Congress shall make no law". The US cannot make a law restricting freedom of speech (within limits, there ARE laws restricting speech and they've been ruled constutional). It does not say that we may never deal with countries with similar laws. Also the constituion is implicitly and even explicitly a document of United States law. It does not apply to other countries and was never intended to. If it did, we'd be pulling an Iraq on nearly every nation in the world.

      Anyhow the FBI didn't coperate in any sense that they permitted it. They had fuck all to say, they can't stop it, again Britan is a soverign nation. The FBI can't say no. What they did was went along and explained the situation to Rackspace, and the UK authorities conducted the seizure.

      So if you want to argue the FBI should have ignored a treaty the US signed (and I'd then tell you to read article 3 of the Constution) that's fine, but don't pretend like they made this happen. Had they just sat this out, the British police would have acted on their own.

    5. Re:Why would I do that? by AoT · · Score: 1

      If congress passes a law whereby the authority of the United States is used to deprive people of their right to free speech what difference does it make if other countries are involved.

      As for your speculation about how much the FBI was involved, it is just that, speculation.

      More than that. One of the prime countries to crack down on Indymedia in Europe has been Italy, the largest country of the indymedia sites effected by this. If you look back to the protest in Genoa, Italy you will find that the Italian Caribinieri(paramilitary) went into a school housing an indymedia collective and beat the people inside quite horribly. So bad that the news crews that toured the building afterwards found blood throughout.

      Burlesconi is a media barron. He, or his family, control somewhere aroubd 95% of private Italian media. He really doesn't want competition.

      This is not to say that he necesarily was the major factor behind this; only that that is, a far as I can tell, the most likely explination.

      If that is true then I'd say any law which requires the FBI to cooperate with foreign treaties or gives them the power, or authority, to cooperate must be unconstitional.

    6. Re:Why would I do that? by Xenophon+Fenderson, · · Score: 1

      While I am a big fan of people not slandering me, and while I don't think it's usually a good idea to shout "Fire" in a crowded theater, some of the high court's arguments sound a little like Bill Clinton asking what the meaning of "is" is. I mean, ruling that a form of expression is not speech? So if we don't like how the Constitution or its amendments read, we just redefine the words to mean what we like? I'm not a strict constructionist (or whatever the hell kind of law it is where you have to interpret the Constitution according to the way "the Founding Fathers" intended), but these kinds of arguments sound specious to me.

      But that's just my uninformed opinion. I could be wrong.

      --
      I'm proud of my Northern Tibetian Heritage
  39. Why the government might object to Indymedia. by jbn-o · · Score: 0

    Because Indymedia was used to spread information leading to people wondering if Bush was coached through the first so-called "debate" against John Kerry via an earpiece. Indymedia has also been used to organize the efforts of many who oppose the invasion of Iraq and the Iraq occupation.

    Perhaps the FBI would also like to scare Indymedia into submission or silence. Other media outlets have been remarkably docile with the President's staff, distributing whatever information they put out without questioning it. This compliance helps explain why the American public went from initially not wanting the invasion of Iraq to supporting it soon after Col. Powell lied to the UN and the world about the evidence for weapons of mass destruction used (in part) to justify the invasion of Iraq. As more information about that evidence gets out and as more people learn more about the particulars of the invasion and occupation, they don't like it. Information can sway opinions, so if an administration does something against the will of the people information control becomes important.

    If the FBI could not care less about Indymedia this event never would have happened. My speculations as to why the FBI acted as they did might be completely wrong, but one thing is clear: the FBI did care. The question is why they cared and what were they really after.

    1. Re:Why the government might object to Indymedia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The earpeice thing was on thousands of blogs and Salon. Nobody associates that information with Indymedia (because nobody in institutional culture reads Indymedia).

    2. Re:Why the government might object to Indymedia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The debate rules stated the candidates' backs couldn't be shown on TV. They were shown and a rectangular item is clearly visible on the President's back. He takes his time when responding to questions; the first couple sentences wander or are very general. He often abruptly stops in the middle of a sentence and comes through with a sharp phrase stating what he thinks, even though moments before he seemed clueless.

      There's not necessarily anything in his ear. Perhaps it is attached to his teeth.

  40. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    ...Indy Media has used freedom of speech as an excuse for hate-speech.


    As emotionally convincing as that might sound, it's still censorship. "Hate" is not illegal.
  41. Re:Artificial Intelligence.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think he either meant "I'm really fucking tired," or "I just smoked the best weed in the fucking universe."

  42. Re:Artificial Intelligence.... by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 1

    ...Giving intelligent hard drives human status, I think.

  43. paranoid babbling by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I love it when the tinfoil hats birgade comes out on slashdot, its better than TV.

    Ok, just to turn the paranoia knob down ten notches here, why would the fbi/cia/M5/etc. bother to try to install key or traffic loggers? They have already demonstraited that they can literally own the box any damn time they want it. In addition, they could just slap a copy of carnivor (or whatever passes for it in Europe) on the ISP trunks, and read anything they want, and no ammount of reformatting or scanning would detect it.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:paranoid babbling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or turn it back up. Given all the resources the guv has, why even bother to sieze the HDs at all? It's obvious Indymedia did something to catch someone's attention.

      My guess is to make the statement "hey, we own you". Not to Indymedia directly perhaps, but I'm certain several other news sources are paying attention.

      If they have access to all the info on the drives, why sieze the drives? Well, carnivor lets you read info, it doesn't let you manipulate the info. Being as Rackspace isn't talking, it's hard to say exactly what is on those drives.

      Do you really want to consider what piece of software might be on those drives now? And wouldn't it be great if all the other servers networked to Rackspace severs were to suddenly go down? Or maybe Rackspace has the mark of cain on them, and no one else links to them?

      I dunno, but if M5 showed up at my doorstep demanding my HDs, I think a bit of paranoia is in order.

    2. Re:paranoid babbling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't look for a conspiracy when there is a more rational explanation, such as photos of undercover agents being posted.

    3. Re:paranoid babbling by uofitorn · · Score: 0

      "I love it when the tinfoil hats birgade comes out on slashdot, its better than TV." "In addition, they could just slap a copy of carnivor (or whatever passes for it in Europe) on the ISP trunks, and read anything they want, and no ammount of reformatting or scanning would detect it." Sounds like someone hasn't taken his own medicine.

      --
      "What kind of music do pirates listen to?" -Paul Maud'dib
      "Yeeeaaarrrrr n' Bee!!" -Stilgar, Leader of Sietch Tabr
    4. Re:paranoid babbling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Don't look for a conspiracy when there is a more rational explanation, such as photos of undercover agents being posted.


      But don't you see?! That's just their cover story!!!

    5. Re:paranoid babbling by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

      And really, what would it solve? Like the parent said, a keylogger is pointless and a traffic logger is pretty close to it if encryption is properly applied (and I assume with the fanfare IM generates...).

      I mean, everyone can break out and say "there's a loophole in the encryption!", but until I see it, I'll feel comfortable using ssh and PGP. Besides, if someone really wants to know what you're doing, they'll find out regardless.

    6. Re:paranoid babbling by SJ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who ever said anything about tin-foil hats? I would just call it common sense.

      If someone comes storming in to your place and takes all your computers without telling you anything, and then brings them back a week later with a big smile and still doesn't tell you anything, would that not suggest that something just ain't right?

    7. Re:paranoid babbling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have already demonstraited that they can literally own the box any damn time they want it

      Where was this?? This public owning that everybody seems to know about?? First you call us tinfoil brigade, then you throw out opinions based as fact?? Sounds like you are spreading FUD.

    8. Re:paranoid babbling by jeti · · Score: 1

      AFAIK Indymedia servers don't log IP addresses. So it's questionable whether any useful information was found.
      However, installing a backdoor could enable agencies to log and retrieve IP addresses from now on.

    9. Re:paranoid babbling by ti.payn · · Score: 1

      Honestly couldn't agree more. The entire thing is just ... odd.

    10. Re:paranoid babbling by EDSdrone · · Score: 1

      Surely paranoia is when you *think* someone is after you. When half a dozen Will Smith MIB types bust into your place demanding your drives they *are* after you. Bad guys at the door, invoke tinfoil hat!

    11. Re:paranoid babbling by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

      Exactly what are you up to that you refer to law enforcement official as 'bad guys'?

      Really now, this is what I am talking about. I don't buy into that officer friendly crap that every cop in the world wants to be my buddy, but 'bad guys'? Terrorists are bad guys. The Nazis were bad guys. The fbi/cia/m5 are, at worst, misguided guys...

      --

      HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  44. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    Your argument is so utterly powerful that I am stunned by the magnitude of its force. Your rhetoric is sublime and your mastery of the facts unassailable. I think you have single handedly managed to convince twenty thousand diehard Bush voters to swing the other way.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  45. First by d3ity · · Score: 1, Interesting

    First thing I'd do if I was indymedia was have those drives replaced...possibly the whole box if possible. Secondly I'd switch server companies entirley to prevent any sort of "tapping" through another host (man in the middle) The patriot act, the one thing I completley disagree with President Bush on. Gotta love it.

    1. Re:First by 6.023e23 · · Score: 1

      And if the FBI or whoever wanted to do the sort of "tapping" you suggest, you feel switching to a different hosting company will stop them how?

  46. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From what I've heard from some gay friends, a good number of Bush supporters already "swing the other way"--they just don't admit it in public.

    ~~~

  47. With friends like Rackspace ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who needs enemies? THANKS RACKSPACE! http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/10/1704102.php

  48. Re:Indy Media Watch by lewko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Depends where you live...

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  49. probably just upgrades... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They probably just upgraded the software on the servers to comply with the newly proposed federal internet wiretapping laws, since so much subversive activity is happening there.

    And probably made it easier to later, remotely remove certain questionable content, should it appear on the site.

  50. Learn to love the PATRIOT ACT by gad_zuki! · · Score: 0

    Where do you think this gag order Rackspace (a US company) is under comes from? In fact when the ACLU was fighting the PATRIOT ACT they werent allowed to say why.

    Hi, welcome to Bush's America. John Ashcroft will be your host.

    Bush/Cheney 04
    Don't change horses in mid-apocalypse.

  51. The problem with banning "hate speech" by Richard_J_N · · Score: 1

    The issue of "Hate speech" is a vexed one. On the one hand, we (most decent humans) don't want vicious racist comments to be made. On the other hand:

    1)Free speech is far too important a principle to censor.
    2)Who gets to determine precisely what is offensive?
    3)Who guards the guards ("quis custodet custodes ipsos")
    4)Most importantly, if we engage in dialog with racists, we will win, and demonstrate the flaws in their arguments. If we do not engage, they can rant unopposed. If we drive them out of politics, then instead of political activism, a radical fringe emerges, becoming terrorists.

    Lastly, if this were really the issue, why the gag order?

  52. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Err, no offense, but in America, that reason doesn't cut it.

    We don't ban speech because we dislike it. And yes, I find hate speech positively loathsome, and its producers dispicable.

  53. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by bstadil · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I know it's childish I am just letting out steam.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  54. Should you be surpised by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If this is a US government initutive, remember that they have been holding poeple in a convenient lawless zone in Cuba for three years without laying charges. Due process can be ignored in more and more situations.

  55. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Namely, that Indy Media has used freedom of speech as an excuse for hate-speech

    Excuse me, but the only thing i see in that blog is that Indymedia users have a left-wing and anti-zionist stance... that isn't "hate speech" in my book.

  56. What the FBI did with the Hard drives by DMC_DMC_DMC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In forensices cases involving hard drives the drives are copied bit by bit to an image file. That image file is then mounted, data recovery is run, and then the drive is searched. Here are some common type Q's. (Not my company... best link I could find) http://www.dminfo.com/faqs.html

  57. Re:For more background info see the sysadmin's blo by stevo3232 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You might also want to talk to the people on irc.indymedia.org , #blag, Jebba hangs out there _ALOT_ (he's there right now). Don't forget blag linux lost data too, including their Repo's, their wiki, their bugzilla, and alot more. I hope IndyMedia and blag get their stuff back.

    --
    s.clementmonkey@sympatico.ca, remove the 'monkey'.
  58. Federal Computer Search and Seizure Guidelines by MacDork · · Score: 1

    If the search of an ISP's drives is going to take more than a few hours, I believe it's standard procedure to seize the drives, copy them, and return them. I think the only time limitation is up to whoever signs the warrant. Parent is correct. They could easily just carnivore the upstream, and if they really needed to get at the server for traffic analysis, they'd just write themselves a warrant and do a black bag job per the PATRIOT Act Sec. 215. Why would you raid a place and alert the world to your presence if the goal is to monitor ongoing traffic? I don't have a lot of confidence in our government, but they aren't that stupid. (BTW, Section 215 does not sunset... ever! Ahhh crap, does that mean I'm now a rambling paranoid too...)

    1. Re:Federal Computer Search and Seizure Guidelines by he-sk · · Score: 1

      Why would you raid a place and alert the world to your presence if the goal is to monitor ongoing traffic?

      Reverse psychology?

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
  59. You know what: by toby · · Score: 3, Insightful
    if we (americans) would quit putting our nose where it doesn't belong, that 9/11 would not have happened.
    You are absolutely right. I hope you vote.

    --
    you had me at #!
  60. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In some European countries it is *cough*France*cough*Germany*cough*

  61. Thing is, that might be legal by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unless you know Swedish law (assuming Sweden did orignate the request) don't assume things. It might be perfectly legal for police to Sweden to intimidate people in this fashion, and illegal for protestors to respond by taking pictures and publishing them.

    Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to the American idea of freedom and democracy. There are rights we have in the US that you do not in other free countries, and rights they have that we do not.

    So don't apply an American legal viewpoint to it.

    1. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by Robber+Baron · · Score: 0, Troll

      Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to the American idea of freedom and democracy. There are rights we have in the US that you do not in other free countries, and rights they have that we do not.

      Nice troll!

      --

      You're using her as bait, Master!

    2. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by SishGupta · · Score: 2, Informative

      Where did you get Sweden from? According to my understanding, the request is from Switzerland.

    3. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by killjoe · · Score: 3, Funny

      Bah! They all look alike.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    4. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by jd · · Score: 1

      Oh, I don't think it's a troll. The rest of the world doesn't have pending investigations of voter registration fraud, mass computer failures on touch-screen balloting machines, etc. I'm actually quite glad the rest of the world doesn't ascribe to American views on democracy. :)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    5. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by jd · · Score: 1

      It's a conspiracy, I tell ya! The Swedes, in an attempt to divert attention from their plan to Take Over The World (under the supervision of The Brain) blackmailed the Swiss into invading Britain, via the FBI, by threatening to take the chocolate away from the dairy cows. Oh, and I think they also kidnapped Heidi and if the Swiss don't capitulate, they'll make another TV series.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice baseless dismissal!

    7. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by BlueUnderwear · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to the American idea of freedom and democracy.

      Tooooot! Toooot! And it's a good thing too! We prefer real freedom (rather than all expenses-paid-holidays in Guantamo Bay), and real democracy (with more than two indistinguishable parties to chose among).

      There are rights we have in the US that you do not in other free countries,...

      That must be the French use of "other"...

      --
      Say no to software patents.
    8. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by MeanSolutions · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > It might be perfectly legal for police to Sweden to
      > intimidate people in this fashion, and illegal for
      > protestors to respond by taking pictures and
      > publishing them.

      No, it isn't legal for the police to intimidate people like that. And there is no law preventing protesters from carrying cameras either.

      As for the protesters publishing the pictures, IANAL etc., if the police, secret or not, is stupid enough to allow themselves to be photographed when they are supposed to keep their identity secret, they should be disciplined by their superiors. As far as I am aware, a normal police officer can not complain if he has his photo taken at a demonstration. (Freedom of the press etc.)

      > Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to
      > the American idea of freedom and democracy.

      Awwww.. Good post right up until there.. Don't go there mate, just don't go there.. You are opening a can of worms better left unopened.

      > There are rights we have in the US that you do
      > not in other free countries, and rights they
      > have that we do not.

      This I agree with. And looking at the nordic countries (for the geographically challenged out there, 'scandinavia' or 'the nordics' is not a country...) there is rather a lot of freedoms and rights you have not got that exist elsewhere.

      In how many nations on the earth can you, as a citizen, start a *direct* dialogue with, uhm, your minister of defence? (Hint, I have done.)

      Could you stop your PM/President in the street when you recognize him and have a friendly chat about some political issue without getting arrested or getting your ass shot off by some secret service trigger happy dude?

      In Sweden (and probably in Denmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland) you can stop your PM/President in the street and talk to them.

      I know from experience that trying to get in touch with the Foregin Minister in UK is a mission in futility. I would hazard a guess that that holds true in the US as well.

      --
      Swedish, but resident in the UK since 1996.
    9. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to the American idea of freedom and democracy. There are rights we have in the US that you do not in other free countries, and rights they have that we do not.

      Do not underestimate the second part of your statement. Post 9/11, the USA have gone way too far in ignoring the civil rights of their own citizens, and it is far worse for those who are NOT US citizens but happen to get involved in some US versus "Rest Of World" conflict.

      Right now, I am happy to live in Germany rather than the USA, despite some unhealthy tendencies I see here as well (government desiring excessive internet surveillance).

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    10. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by Proteus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      > Remember that the world does NOT subscribe to the American idea of freedom and democracy.

      Awwww.. Good post right up until there.. Don't go there mate, just don't go there.. You are opening a can of worms better left unopened.
      Everyone seems to be misunderstanding the poster. He isn't saying "the world isn't free or democratic, only America is." Instead it is more "the world doesn't always agree with America on the definitions of 'freedom' and 'democracy'". Which is a completely accurate statement.

      Read the context people -- in the very next paragraph, he explains what he means.
      --
      We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
    11. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by eean · · Score: 1

      1. If you think the two parties are indistinguishable, you've either been asleep for 4 years or what are you smoking and where did you get it?

      2. It is true that our enlightenment-era Constitution has more protection for freedom of speech and religion then most European nations. The recent ban on head scarves in French schools never could have occured in the US. Well, maybe not 'never occured' but it would require our Supreme Court to be replaced by facists (I doubt even our conservative justices would've gone along with such a ban).

    12. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by sepluv · · Score: 1
      US...freedom(?)...democracy(?)...hmmm..who modded this up...

      (especially compared to Switzerland (not Sweden) which is the most free and demcratic country in the world)

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    13. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by mcubed · · Score: 1

      (especially compared to Switzerland (not Sweden) which is the most free and demcratic country in the world)

      Right ... Switzerland, the country that closed its borders to the Jews during WWII. There's "neutrality," then there's just not giving a damn about anyone but yourself, except of course those kind African despots whose money you can hide for them.

      In all my travels in Europe, Switzerland struck me as easily the most souless country on the continent, not to mention frighteningly monolithic. (What good is having a populace that speaks so many different languages when they all say basically the same thing?) If it takes trading spirit, individuality, and a sense of compassion for what you describe as "free" and "democratic," I'll pass.

      Michael

      --
      "No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality;..."
    14. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      In Sweden (and probably in Denmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland) you can stop your PM/President in the street and talk to them.

      And yet recent events show why this might not be the best thing in the World.

      Not trying to flame either -- just pointing out something obvious. I think it's cool that you can walk up and chit-chat with such high-level officials but that incident clearly shows why it might not always be a good idea.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    15. Re:Thing is, that might be legal by MeanSolutions · · Score: 1

      > And yet recent events show why this might not be the
      > best thing in the World.

      Aye, that is a price to pay when the minister in question is ignoring advice to have protection because there is a discernable threat.

      It has happened before, Feb 28th 1986, when Olof Palme, the PM, was killed in Stockholm late at night.

      However - in an open society where you feel you can approach the people in office this is a risk that you have to take. Most politicians in scandinavia feel that this is a risk worth taking.

      > Not trying to flame either -- just pointing out
      > something obvious. I think it's cool that you can
      > walk up and chit-chat with such high-level officials
      > but that incident clearly shows why it might not
      > always be a good idea.

      No offence taken. The murder of Anna Lindh was a shock to all of Sweden and probably to a fair few people outside Sweden as well. It was not something anyone had anticipated.

      But being able to talk with high-level officials is very very valuable, as is a society that is as transparent (as few secrets) as possible. /A

      --
      Swedish, but resident in the UK since 1996.
  62. America is less safe today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    IndyMedia is a haven for terrorists and their leftist liberal sympathizers. The FBI is doing a significant disservice to our country by releasing these servers back to these criminals and scumbags who would destroy our way of life. I hope other slashdot users will join me in writing to our congressmen to express our deep concern over this failure in our war against terror.


    Keep America Safe. Bush Cheney 2004.

    1. Re:America is less safe today by haraldm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dear Anonymous Coward,

      (too chicken-hearted to post with a proper account? Well.)

      "leftist" and "liberal" seem to be bad values for you per se, and your "way of life" as we've seen it in the past couple of decades has made the world a worse place to begin with. You are about 4% of the world population, and you are using more than 25% of the world's energy resources. Simply because you can (like the dog who licks its balls, ya know) by using your sheer power. From large parts of the remaining 96% of the world's population's perspective, the current U.S. foreign energy politics is worse than a locust plague in Africa. And to make sure you have free access to the remaining couple of gallons of oil, you raid other countries on obviously and provenly false accusations and lies. This country (Iraq) is now really a terrorist's haven, and whoever will be elected the next U.S. president will have a hard time getting out of this mess without losing face. America's foreign politics since the 60's was a sheer mess: Central America, Iran/Contra, Vietnam, supporting Saddam against Iran in the 80's (Rumsfeld), supporting the Taliban against the Soviet army (that wasn't much better) in Afghanistan in the 80's -- do I need to quote more? The last major good thing was liberating Europe from the Nazi terror, but that does not give the U.S. eternal credit. Bush turned a nice budget surplus into hundreds of billions of new debts within just 4 years, with very little or no positive effect on employment rates, children's education or health care. And all just for the heck of it.

      Had the U.S. stayed at home and not tamper with everybody else's business without consulting international partners and organizations, you'd have one or two problems less ("international terrorism" for example). I'm not talking about joint operations like on the Balkan - just about this extremist unilateralism we see today, and I sincerely hope this will go away soon. You must not expect that the rest of the world sits still and prays to God that "America will prevail".

      If that is your "way of life", I can certainly do without it. I for one prefer Indymedia style journalism over Fox TV.

      --
      open (SIG, "</dev/zero"); $sig = <SIG>; close SIG;
    2. Re:America is less safe today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus is a leftist liberal.

    3. Re:America is less safe today by Jamesie · · Score: 1

      Had the U.S. stayed at home and not tamper with everybody else's business without consulting international partners and organizations, you'd have one or two problems less

      This ignores the context of the last half a century or so, specifically the second world war and the cold war.

    4. Re:America is less safe today by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Hey, some of the moderators got it...you see it's been moderated "Funny". Funny in sort of a sad, fatalistic way, but funny nonetheless.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    5. Re:America is less safe today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. I said "without consulting international partners and organizations", and this was neither the case in the 2nd world war (coalition with France and Great Britain, plus some more) or the cold war (NATO). In case of Irak, there was some consulting, but only on a bilateral basis (especially with the UK). And I was only talking about Irak. The U.S engagement in Irak undoubtedly made the world less safe, and this will require our joint attention for the next couple of decades, thank you very much. And by the way, the cold war is over, as is WWII. Nobody denies the US merits during this phase when going multilateral but most if not all of the US unilateral engagements ended in chaos.

      I served as a German airforce officer from 1980 - 1992, 7 years of which I worked in a NATO radar station, and I studied US foreign policy during my time at university. I guess I have a certain idea what I'm talking about. It's not about anti-americanism, believe me. It's just that the current US government is a danger for the whole world.

  63. Police Repression in Genoa 2001 by Jack+Action · · Score: 3, Informative
    I can remember getting realtime updates from IMC Italy during the anti-Globalization protests in Genoa. The police were storming the IMC headquarters were activists were sleeping, eating, typing in news-stories etc. People were getting smashed with truncheons, taken down, beaten--the Rodney King-type treatment. Those arrested were taken to police barracks where they were threatened with rape and where the police were singing Mussonlini-era facist hymns.

    Long afterwards, a judge found the entire raid on the IMC headquarters had been a complete fabrication. The police had planted Molotov cocktails, a sledgehammer, knives etc. in the building. As for agent provocateurs, there is no doubt these were operating in Italy--though they were probably oldtime fascist sympathizers, not undercover cops (though in Italy, the line is blurred).

    When you say how many stories has IMC broken, I think you miss the point. How many stories has Slashdot "broken"--and by this I think you mean stories that have made it into national and international media? IMC, like Slashdot, is community media, and serves to communicate information and build connections between those who use it. Thanks to IMC, I was in North America yet I knew what was happening to comrades in Italy.

    IMC keeps the flow of information open because it has an open posting policy. With more and more online newspapers disappearing behind subscription walls, often times the only way an important article can released into the wild is by posting on IMC. More "legit" sites won't post entire articles that covered by copyright, say stories on E-Voting from the New York Times or Washington Post. Google hits an IMC site once, and that article is forever cached in its entirety.

    This also begs the question, what important stories has the New York Times broken recently? It all seems to be happening at the New Yorker with Seymour Hersh...

    1. Re:Police Repression in Genoa 2001 by mpe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Long afterwards, a judge found the entire raid on the IMC headquarters had been a complete fabrication. The police had planted Molotov cocktails, a sledgehammer, knives etc. in the building.

      The police probably felt they needed a distraction after the murder of a protestor.

      As for agent provocateurs, there is no doubt these were operating in Italy--though they were probably oldtime fascist sympathizers, not undercover cops (though in Italy, the line is blurred).

      Nothing to stop them having been "encouraged" by Italian authorities. When it comes to state sponsorship of terrorism, especially domestic, the concept of "plausable deniability" is important.

  64. HDs Were Cloned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In any investigation like this, the procedure is to clone the HDs and leave them untouched. This is largely to satisfy forensic evidentiary rules, but also so they can screw around with the data as much as they want to. It's a safe bet the HDs were not modified, but it's a definite bet the HDs are cloned. Count on it.

    And by the way, if your servers ever drop out of sight mysteriously for 12 hours or so, and you're never given a solid explanation why by your provider, seriously consider if the feds stopped by to clone the drives. Happened to a project whose backend I was privy to. Paranoid? Sure. But possible? Yes.

  65. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    I live in the SF bay area. "Letting out steam" at Bush is the regional pasttime. You would think I would be used to it by now, but I'm not. It's so fucking annoying I want to scream.

    Once, just one, would you guys please stop "letting out steam" and put forth a cogent, rational and CALM argument for your side? You're like lemmings after the nuke button was pushed: quivering in rage until you pop. For the life of my I couldn't tell you what Kerry stands for, because his "supporters" are too busy slamming Bush to tell me anything at all about Kerry.

    "Duh! He's not Bush, isn't that good enough for you!"

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  66. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  67. Re:For more background info see the sysadmin's blo by suwain_2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is an excerpt from a previous message he received from Rackspace, which seems to be about something different. I find the text very troubling. (The text is taken from here)

    Rackspace said:
    Mon Oct 4 07:30:53 2004

    Hello,

    I am sorry for the tone of the ticket you referenced. However, we are at the mercy of the DMCA as it is written. As a hosting provider, once we have received a DMCA notification, we are responsible for removing the offending material regardless of the merit of the complaint. In fact, we are not even to look into the merits of the complaint. We are only to act to remove the offending material as quickly as possible. If we fail to remove the material, we can be held liable for damages.


    Essentially, they're saying that while he may well be correct that his material doesn't infringe any copyrights, Rackspace is legally obliged to remove it immediately.

    I've long known that the DMCA was a terrible law. I didn't know it went quite this far, though.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  68. Re:Indy Media Watch by lewko · · Score: 1

    And they are probably good examples of how a little hate speech can go a long way...

    We are seeing the same thing today in Arab countries where childrens minds are poisoned and the result is terrorists.

    As for free speech, it's interesting to note how someone modded my earlier post and its parents down as flamebait rather than responding, presumably because they love Indymedia and loath fair criticism of it...

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  69. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  70. HA HA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone educating people on an insular worldview can't tell Sweden from Switzerland

  71. how the hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    isn't taking someones server invasion of privacy? must they be subject to a rectal exam before you consider it an invasion of privacy?

  72. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    For the life of my I couldn't tell you what Kerry stands for,

    He doesn't have to really "stand" for anything - even plain old boring conscientious stewardship of the duties of the Presidency would place him miles above Bush in terms of qualifications & stature.

    What does Bush stand for? You have to ignore what Bush _says_ he stands for, because what he says & what he does are pretty much disconnected. So what do his actions show that he stands for? Preemptive unilateral military action? Corporate welfare? Destruction of the social state?

  73. The hard-drives will be treated as "hacked" by flacco · · Score: 1, Redundant

    i'd treat the entire server as compromised.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    1. Re:The hard-drives will be treated as "hacked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To me it seems that the entire legal system has to be treated as compromised.

  74. Re:For more background info see the sysadmin's blo by jrockway · · Score: 1

    Are they saying that if I sent slashdot this letter that slashdot would have to immediately take themselves off-line? What?


    Dear slashdot.

    I do not like this site. Please take it down immediately.

    Sincerely,
    Dewey Cheetam & Howe Law Firm

    --
    My other car is first.
  75. Re:Indy Media Watch by Rufus211 · · Score: 1

    I generally think that the type of people Indy Media attracts are somewhat nutty anarchists and I agree with very little that they say. That being said, I don't care if the website's for Indy Media, neo-nazi's, abortion clinic bombers, pro-choice activists, or anything else, something like this should *not* happen. If they had been handed a proper government suppena saying exactly why the servers were being taken and what law was being violated I wouldn't have that much of a problem with it and Indy Media could fight the seizure through the normal legal chanels. However, any sort of secret, gag-ordered operation where things (and next people?) simply dissappear with no explenation sounds dangerously close to most dictatorships.

  76. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by AoT · · Score: 1

    I didn't see Fascist, Nazi or Hitler in the post once. That's reasoned debate for both sides these days.

  77. The bark is louder than the bite. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    I thought I recalled that a couple of weeks ago there were congressional hearings on it, and a federal investigation led by US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.

    Just because you haven't been keeping up on the case doesn't mean nothing's happening.

    The investigation you refer to began almost a year ago. It is not an independent investigation. The call to save evidence in the case began days after the scandal first broke allowing time to destroy evidence. So far we still don't know exactly who should be brought to justice for first leaking the information. I have a hard time believing an independent investigation will materialize any time soon but by now so much time has passed I would wonder how effective one could be.

    Months ago there were follow-ups to hearings on rapes within the military. C-SPAN covered the hearings and in so doing brought some public attention to the issue. This awareness did not stop the rapes nor institute policy that will lead to institutional change. As a result of no clear leadership change or change in policy which places rapists on trial and brings them to justice regardless of rank, I think it's safe to say that rapes will continue to occur within the US military.

    The June 2003 FCC meeting (where the FCC voted to further loosen media ownership caps) was publicized. A broad spectrum of political groups followed the issue and the FCC received more feedback than ever before (virtually all opposing raising the caps). A court sent the FCC's ruling back to them for revisions but public's focus on this issue has largely evaporated. Some corporate media outlets still operate in violation of the current limit on media ownership.

    Big public hearings don't in themselves mean that the underlying system is changing. Sometimes the hearings give the impression of change where no significant change occurs.

  78. Rackspace are not trustworthy.... by Phil+John · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...we've got a few clients who host with rackspace, but after this we've recommended that they find another provider.

    Rackspace have come out of this with egg on their faces and I seriously hope that it hurts their business big-time. I also hope that they will be compensating indymedia and all the other sites hosted on those servers for the lost time, aggrivation and general shittyness of the whole thing.

    --
    I am NaN
    1. Re:Rackspace are not trustworthy.... by vidarh · · Score: 2

      Uhm, they have no choice but to comply when it's done under court order, unless the individual employees want to end up in jail.

    2. Re:Rackspace are not trustworthy.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      so they switch to another provider which still has to obey a court order. you can only switch so many times, and if the host doesnt want to goto jail for your customers, they will obey the law as lame as it might be. so your not gaining much from this.

      the downtime is not rackspaces fault so they should not have to compensate the customer. if the customer doesnt like it, tell them to ask the FBI to compensate them. oh and good luck on that one...

    3. Re:Rackspace are not trustworthy.... by RecycledElectrons · · Score: 1

      Funny...Some jews said that in 1943. I'll go down fighting. Andy Out!

  79. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right on, I live in the SF Bay area too. So I have heard my fair share of Kerry sopporters. Always raging on and on like lunatics. Why do so many crazies support Kerry?

  80. Just in time for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Team america world police, which is coming out pretty soon right?

  81. Re:More importantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would these be the same detainees, that once released, are again taking civilians of countries against the war in Iraq hostage, ie. the Chinese working in Pakistan who are being held hostage by followers of a freed prisoner from Gitmo who was returned to Pakistan/Afghanistan and, apparently, is involved in terrorist activities yet again. The Chinese engineers were helping the locals build a hydroelectric dam and are now being held hostage with explosives strapped to their bodies. Where are the protesters for their Human rights? Why are the local Muslim leaders not condemming this action since the Chinese were against any action in Iraq? Maybe the issue is just a little bigger than Bush being President. Tensions with the Islamic world go back centuries, ie. they happened long before the Bush Administration took office.

  82. Sweden != Switzerland by mowler2 · · Score: 1

    Sweden does is NOT the same country as Switzerland. In sweden you need a "search warrant" to seize harddrives, and for that you need some "proof" of illegal activity, and some court order, etc - this is not trivial to get.

    But then again, who knows what is required after all these new anti-terrorism laws from USA that is imposed on every other country??

    1. Re:Sweden != Switzerland by danheskett · · Score: 1

      Well you should go ahead and cram your insuations up your you know what, since it certainly looks the FBI here was obeying it's legally binding treaties at the behest of the Swedes and Italians.

    2. Re:Sweden != Switzerland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignorance is blizz, right? Read the text again.. Swiss is not Swedes.

    3. Re:Sweden != Switzerland by mowler2 · · Score: 1

      LOL.

      This is Sweden.

      This is Switzerland.

      I do not understand how people can confuse those two all the time - again and again. :)

    4. Re:Sweden != Switzerland by nosfucious · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't worry, I'm still telling various people* that they will NOT find kangaroos in Austria. I'm currently in Switzerland (not Sweden), and Austria is often their next destination. They get all disappointed after that ...

      * Who these people might be is left as an exercise for the reader.

      --
      Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
  83. Re:Indy Media Watch by lewko · · Score: 1

    Given that most of the news of this story was reported through Indy Media, and given the low credibiltiy to begin with, it's entirely likely we aren't getting the 'whole story' versus another chance for looney 'activists' to condemn the poh-leese etc.

    As for being handed a subpoena etc, I think you need to think harder about how law-enforcement works. The police don't knock on a drug-dealers house and say "umm...It's the Police, may we come in?" and give the perp a chance to flush the evidence (reformat drives). They kick in the door, capture evidence and let the courts sort it out.

    I also think you need to think harder about dictatorships before waving such comparisons about.

    It's a shame that the site referenced in the grandparent was considered flame-bait.

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  84. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Duh! He's not Bush, isn't that good enough for you!"

    Bush is so bad that yes, it should be more than enough.

  85. It doesnt matter by Exter-C · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Realistically IF you have data you dont want hidden or read then dont put it on the net.. If you have information that you want everyone to know and see mirror it around the internet as many times as you can.. There is NO way that once information is on the internet and about that the FBI or any gov can remove it from the net.

  86. Compromised hardware and disks? by j.leidner · · Score: 1
    Very obscure circumstances. Is there no official police statement anywhere?

    It has been verified that the returned hard-drives are the originals ... The hard-drives will be treated as "hacked" (compromised)

    That's an interesting aspect. It might be worth not re-formatting the drives, but rather investigate whether any spyware has been installed (or maybe data modified), using the same forensic methods that law enforcement agencies use.

    The hallmark of democracy is that state powers are also controlled themselves, by institutions and its citizens.

    --
    Try Nuggets , the mobile search engine. We answer your questions via SMS, across the UK.

  87. Re:For more background info see the sysadmin's blo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    FROM:
    http://jebba.blagblagblag.org/

    EFF has contacted the FBI to demand Indymedia's illegally seized servers be returned and is preparing for legal action in the event that negotiations with the FBI fail. EFF is also calling on Rackspace to challenge the government's illegal seizure. "If Rackspace stands behind its claim of providing 'Fanatical Support' to its customers, it will go to bat for Indymedia-one of its biggest customers-and demand that the FBI return the seized Internet servers," said Kurt Opsahl, EFF staff attorney. "Rackspace should also fight for its own rights and challenge the gag order preventing it from sharing its side of the story." A federal court in New York City recently found a similar gag order unconstitutional in Doe v. Ashcroft, the ACLU's challenge to a secret PATRIOT Act subpoena served against an Internet service provider.

    "The FBI can't pull the plug on more than 20 news websites - our modern printing presses - based on a secret proceeding at the request of a foreign government. This is a flagrant violation of the First Amendment," said Kevin Bankston, EFF attorney and Equal Justice Works/Bruce J. Ennis Fellow. "As far as the Constitution is concerned, Indymedia has the same rights as any other news publisher. The government can't shut down the New York Times, and it can't shut down Indymedia."

  88. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...gag-ordered operation where things (and next people?)..."

    Next? How about now.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=19981

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jun2002/bomb-j 12 .shtml

    That article blamed Bush, but I blame the political system. In November, no matter who wins, America loses.... again.

  89. Photos were unredacted by jeti · · Score: 3, Informative

    When I first heard of the story, I looked for mirrors of what is supposed to be the incriminating site.
    It contains four pictures of two guys who are supposedly undercover policemen. The photos have _not_ been redacted.
    I guess it doesn't hurt to post the short text that came with it. But my french is a little rusty and the automatic tranlators do a poor job on this:

    GENÈVE post-G8 : Vidéos, photos et témoignages ; tout est bon pour remonter la piste des casseurs. Un travail minutieux poursuivi aujourd'hui par deux inspecteurs, et qui a conduit à 200 arrestations à ce jour.

    La cellule G8 avait pourtant été dissoute en décembre 2003. Elle a repris du service, en plus petit : deux inspecteurs.

    Ces inspecteurs visionnent des films et photos reçu par des balancent et des collègues.

    Ils viennent aux manifs sur Genève où ils pensent retrouver des "casseurs"

    De plus ils prennent de nouvelles photos afin peut être de constituer une bande de données de photos d'activistes suceptibles d'être les futures casseurs des futures émeutes Genevoises.

    Comme le dit l'un des 2 inspecteurs : J'ai vu deux de mes collègues se faire lyncher pendant les manifs anti-OMC, en 1998, raconte un inspecteur. Je ne l'oublierai jamais.

    Peut etre qu'il y a d'autres choses que cet inspecteur n'obliera jamais ! Car il n'y a pas que le Carpacio comme plat qui se mange froid !

  90. Bad idea by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Maybe apologies, but if you tack on any serious restitution as a matter of course, agents will go out of their way to make charges stick, whatever the truth is. It's like any other job: You fudge your stats to make yourself look better than you really are. Besides, if they do anything too blantently evil, I'm pretty sure their are laws to cover that.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  91. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    We are seeing the same thing today in Arab countries where childrens minds are poisoned and the result is terrorists.

    That generally happens in places where rhetoric can build on actual negative conditions in people's lives. Remove those conditions, and the rhetoric appears quite empty and has a much smaller effect. You're using a flawed argument to show that terrorism is a reason for censorship. You were modded down because most other people on slashdot realize this.
  92. Sounds like a job for freenet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From what i can gather it seems the "guverment" decided they wanted this stuff offline and grabbbed the server HD's. Yes if it had been mirrored or was in the google cache this tactic would have failed *but* you only know what stuff needs to be mirrored after they kick down your door and walk off with your HD and all backups.
    Solution - Put the data on freenet and set your server to act as a freenet gateway that only pull that specific freepage .....

    course until freenet actually gets to version 1.0 this isn't very stable solution :-)

  93. Silly AC, politics are for the rich. by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Let's not kid ourselves here folks. The rest of the world doesn't hate us because we stick our nose in their politics. Joe average (or Mohammad Average? whatever) doesn't give a flying rats ass so long as he's got food, family, and something to do with himself. People don't blow themselves because they're cheesed off over a little meddling. They do so because they're poor, destitute and above all hopelessly miserable (read that again, I meant it literally. These poeple have no hope).

    This is largely our fault folks. Iraq has a large supply of the most valuable substance on earth (oil), and they've got a large supply of hopelessly poor in spite of it all. 9/11's what your SUVs and 50's gas guzzlers have bought you. If you don't like it, too bad. The die is cast. Yeah, we could all start using public transport and ultra fuel effecient cars. But if you think for a momement that the car/oil companies'll let that happen (or the American Public is smart enough to force it), you're just deluded. Period. Fasten up for a bumpy ride, it's gonna get a lot worse before it gets better.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Silly AC, politics are for the rich. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except for the fact that it wasn't iraqi's that attacked us during 9/11. It was saudi arabians.

      And why are saudi arabians attacking us? Because the saudi people want freedom from an oppressive totalitarian regime that you and I as Americans totally and 100% support, because our government supports that regime in our name.

      The simple fact of the matter is that the saudi arabians that died on 9/11 did so as freedom fighters. They struck the only blow that they could against the most brutal enemy they could find in that enemies soft underbelly.

      And it wasn't like Bush didn't know it was going to happen, he was told repeatedly. Bush and Cheney allowed the attacks to happen so that they could shore up one of the weakest presidencies in the history of the united states.

      Wouldn't it be interesting to read what the British newspapers of the day had to say about the way the minutemen wouldn't stand up and fight like a regular army? I'm betting the word cowardly was bandied about a lot. And I am betting that when they hanged Nathan Hale that the british newspapers didn't say patriot... I'm betting the word they used was Pirate or Spy.

  94. Re:More importantly by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    If my neighboor is someone I intensly dislike and vica-versa. Would it be wise to smash down his door and get him out of bed to kick his arse? You are right about the issue, it is bigger than Bush and goes way back. He is not the first leader too lack wisdom but he is by far the most powerfull and belives his "Crusade" will be the last.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  95. Funny, Troll or Flamebait ? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Your answer says more about your own personality than that of the AC.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  96. More Info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    More here, here ,here, and here

    And as a side note; this shut down has effected the non-european sites far more than the european sites.

  97. Recently switched to Rackspace? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    This article about the RNC incident lists another company as thier host provider. Unlike Rackspace they gave the feds the finger, took them to court and won. Did they drop that provider in favour of Rackspace or do they have more than one provider?

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  98. Re:More importantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tell you what, if you ever illegally detain and torture me, you had better kill me, because when you let me go I will dog your every step and see you, your kids and and your family pets dead.

    But hey, no hard feelings, it's just business.

  99. Laws/Morals. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    I was under the impression sectarian law was created in an attempt to stop people with radically different Morals from killing each other. In reality, "The Law" appears to be procedural documentation on how to silence or erase those who do not agree with the mandated Morals. The US constitution is a good attempt at sectarian law. Could this be why Bush is trying to weaken it by his proposal to grant states the right to "make thier own interpretation".

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Laws/Morals. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That's certainly one of the reasons that laws were created. The primary one, though, was to impose the will of the king on his vassals.

      (Don't take every pronouncement that a politician makes seriously. Instead watch what he does. Bush has been acting to radically centralize the power under his control. Rather the opposite of a states rights approach.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Laws/Morals. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      I don't dissagree, Bush is a centralist, eg: centralizing the "intelligence agencies" to a political post. When a politician makes a pronouncement and justifies it with reasoning that goes directly aginst thier overall behaviour you should at least ask why before you write it off as bullshit. There is at least one possible motive why a centralist would want to devolve constitutional interpretation to the states. Done correctly, as in divide and conquer, it would effectively bypass the supreme court and (given enough time) make the constitution unworkable. This is cenralization of power by stealth, gradually watering down an opponents power until they are irrelavent. Bush (or at least his puppet master Cheney) is smart enough to know that the supreme court is still a powerfull advesary to any would be US dictator. Stalin and Hitler both did not change thier countries overnight but could the same thing be done to the US in 8 years? I am an Aussie, the recent election here shows that the majority of Aussies are hard to distinuish from thier sheep.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  100. Re:Indy Media Watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uummm, no. That is what moderate looks like. Left wingers call for the workers to rise up against their burgoise oppressors. I can see why you would be confuses, watching fox news like you do can make the average moderate middle of the road person seem very to the left of "right wing nut job."

    And I am against the Zionists that have killed 30 innocent palestinian children the last 2 weeks. One of the officers not only gunned down a 13 year old girl, but then finished her off with several rounds at point blank range. Pathetic scumbag of an excuse for an officer.

    About 80% of the Zionists are OK in my book though, cause like me, they just want peace and to get along in the world, it's that 20% terror zionist "fringe" element that is in charge of israel that is ruining Zions good name. Kind of like the nut cases in charge of the good ole us of a right now.

  101. British Home Secretary Questions by rleyton · · Score: 2, Informative
    As the systems were seized in the UK, it seems that David Blunkett, the Home Secretary here, was involved in approving the FBI request.

    The Register covers this in more detail, stating that parliamentary questions have been tabled asking "what recent discussions [The Home Secretary] has had with US law enforcement agencies concerning the seizure of material from UK-based internet hosting providers; and if he will make a statement."

    I'd expect we'll see his evasion^h^h^h^h^h^h^hanswer appearing on the excellent theyworkforyou.com

    --
    ooooooh! What does this button do? - DeeDee, Dexters Lab.
  102. Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "and real democracy"

    Really? I wasn't aware of any country in the world that was a democracy. Is everything put to a plebescite?

    Or do you elect representatives who vote on issues? That's not a democracy. You can use google, so I'll let you spend 5 minutes figuring out what that form of government is called.

    1. Re:Democracy? by eean · · Score: 1

      I think there is a rule that if the word 'democracy' is ever used on Slashdot, there has to be some smart-ass fresh from 10th grade government that comes and makes the distinction between Democracy and Republic for us.

    2. Re:Democracy? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Switzerland is the closest to an ancient democracy: the people can force a plebescite on anything by putting together a petition signed by 50,000 citizens.

    3. Re:Democracy? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Maybe Switzerland is a democracy by the book definition of democracy, but the Swiss authorities sure as hell don't like free speech either (that's "free as in speech", not "free as in Pflümli"...)

  103. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Delphinios · · Score: 1

    You forget...

    The first party to invoke Goodwin's Law automatically loses!

    You lose.

  104. NO! it's down to Blair/Blunkett by RMH101 · · Score: 1

    check out the indymedia cache of the story that might have some bearing on why Blunkett was so agreeable to pulling them off the net.

  105. Re:For more background info see the sysadmin's blo by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about writing to the service providers of the politicians who voted for the DMCA in the first place alleging copyright violation. See how they like it...

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  106. COVERUP! this is Blair/Blunkett by RMH101 · · Score: 1

    check out the indymedia cache of the story that might have some bearing on why Blunkett was so agreeable to pulling them off the net.

  107. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
    I am spending my Slashdot Karma just to be able to voice my anger at this administration.

    Yup, and I am dangerously risking my Slashdot Karma by telling everyone that Linux is great, MS is evil, and open source is the way of the future!

    No, wait, agreeing with the moderator group-think doesn't cause you to lose karma at all...

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  108. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by cortana · · Score: 1

    Silence, you communist! Your beloved government started the War on Terror--and once we in the Coalition of the Willing finally win it, no one will ever be terrified again, and those sniveling nations that were to afraid to join us will owe us, big time!

  109. Re:Indy Media Watch by Jamesie · · Score: 1

    Presumably he had to make sure she wasn't about to detonate a bomb.
    If the palestinians would stop hiding behind their exploding children he wouldn't have had to finish her off.

  110. It does by wiredog · · Score: 1
    respect the rights guaranteed under our justice system. Which are only guaranteed in the United States. The US Constitution doesn't have any legal authority in Europe. That's where treaties come into play. Which is what was done here. Switzerland and Italy (apparently) asked the FBI for help getting the data, the FBI determined the data was in the UK, and passed that on to British authorities.

    The British authorities gave Indymedia all the rights it is guaranteed under the British Constitution. Which, as I'm sure aware, doesn't exist. Brits get only the rights that Her Majesty's Government give to them.

  111. Reporters Without Borders condemns the seizures by KjetilK · · Score: 1

    Yep, Reporters Without Borders has condemned the seizures and has a story about their letter to Mr. Blunkett too.

    --
    Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  112. minding our mea culpas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America has certainly done its share of negative things in the world, and there are even certain groups & individuals out there who you wouldn't blame for wanting 9-11 to happen.

    But what exactly caused 9-11?

    The 9-11 attack happened because America committed the heinous sin of not being Muslim. Not being far-extreme Taleban/ Wahhabi Sunni Muslim, that is. Now, how much do you really want to repent of that sin? If you stubbornly persist in your headstrong insubordination [after all, Islam means submission] the terror will continue.

    Think about it.

  113. Can't GIMP convert photos to ASCIIart... by sepluv · · Score: 1

    I'm curious now. Can you post them? This would also have the consequence that /. might get taken down for a while, so a lot of geeks like myself might have to go out into the scary room with the big blue ceiling--it could be a life-changing experience.

    --
    Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
    [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  114. Excuse me?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you are publicly protesting something, why would you care if the police photograph you? After going through the RNC here in New York last month, I'm now 100% convinced that the Indymedia scene is the most self-satisfied, unproductive gang of agent provocateurs roaming today's political scene. Frankly, it was absurd how they would bait the police by pushing down the police motorcycles and then cry foul when the police would arrest someone who pushed a bike. I've never seen such shameless, two-faced futility in my life. A little intimidation would do those shitheads some good.

  115. Indymedia exposed the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Frankly, Indymedia made him out to be worse than he was. CNN said "A protester got killed". When I read the IndyMedia article, the conclusion that I got was "A menacing protester that dressed up like a Tupac Amaru rebel in full garb threw what looked like a molotov cocktail at the police, and if I was a cop, I would shoot the guy for my and everyone's safety".

    Did he deserve to die? No. But was the police officer out of line in his actions? No. Granted, this wasn't Indymedia's intention, but they seemed to have the tacit assumption "That under no circumstances should a demonstrator be killed by 'da man'" Reality does not share that view.

  116. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by AoT · · Score: 1

    I can't lose, it was a joke.

  117. On Line At What Time? by yo_tuco · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "... London will be online at 5pm GMT..."

    Let's be picky... if you look up the definition of the second in the GMT time scale, you will see that it is astronomical based. But the definition of the SI second is derived off an atomic time scale and has been for, what, 30 some years. So report the time on the prime meridian as UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) because it is the basis for civil time world-wide. And last I looked, London is on the planet Earth.

    Yeah, I know... GMT is used interchangably to mean UTC by the layman. But when the rubber meets the road, it is UTC we are talking about especially in sub-second accuracy.

    1. Re:On Line At What Time? by Capitalist1 · · Score: 1

      You're worried about atomic vs. astronomical time definitions and sub-second accuracy? Damn... just how fast can you hit the Refresh button?

      --
      One man's religion is another man's belly-laugh. - LL
    2. Re:On Line At What Time? by yo_tuco · · Score: 1

      "... You're worried about atomic vs. astronomical time definitions and sub-second accuracy? ..."

      No, not really. I take issue with it because GMT is really an obsolete time scale. We no longer (and haven't for 30 years) measured time by its definition. So why not give the correct "units" to your time. That is, we measure time by an atomic time scale... so report your time in an atomic time scale (UTC is an atomic time scale).

      It is kind of like measuring something in inches and reporting that same number as centimeters with the magnitude of error being the biggest difference. In this example both are measurements of length just like GMT/UTC are measurements of a time scale. Yeah, it is being picky because that doesn't mean squat in our everyday lives.

      Have you noticed that today GMT is often used in the context of a time zone in lieu of a time scale? It is an abused time scale indeed. But old public habbits die hard. Just like the public likes to call a measurement of force (ie weight) kilograms ( a unit of mass != force) without the qualifying kilograms-force ( another bastardized thing).

      Again, am I just being picky? Well, yeah, if you know the difference. But for those who don't, they go through life "knowing" weight is kilograms and our time is GMT because that is what they hear. And then one day it becomes a source of confusion when actual difference matters or when someone tries to be technically correct but can't because it will confuses the public.

  118. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Delphinios · · Score: 1

    I'll get you next time, Gadget! Next time!

    *pounds his fist on his armchair*
    *cat hiss*

  119. Pro-riot propaganda by aricusmaximus · · Score: 1

    Mod up responsibly, people. This is rumor, not information.

    I was in the incriminated demonstration
    There's absolutely no reason to believe you.

    On the right side we had peaceful demonstrators (about a million) and on the other a group of about 200 rioteers (the Black Block) helped by some suburb scum
    Really? A million? Any way to back that claim up?

    The root of Indymedia's problems is that there are photos of some Swiss police agents (with their names and addresses, hehe)

    No, not funny. A police officer's job is stressful enough without having his/her house being a target of some asshole or paranoid schizophrenic who think's he's saving the world by harrassing your kids and your home. That's juvenile bullshit.

    The root of Indymedia's problems is that there are photos...

    Really? Perhaps you could have posted a link to these supposed photos?

    It makes me smile though to see the incriminated images have now spread to about 400 mirrors worldwide instead of 2 or 3 sites

    Oh really, where are these supposed mirrors?

    Our local authorities are going batshit about it, yelling they'll have ALL the servers containing those images seized..

    Proof?
    This guy may be telling the truth, or he could be making up 95% of this. Unfortunately, Mr. Max Von H.'s post is so lacking in substance that we'll never know whether he's telling the truth or he's making up most of this to gain notoriety.

    1. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > There's absolutely no reason to believe you.

      Nor any reason to believe you. We all (hopefully) know that nothing should be taken at face value on /., you are just trying to start opposition without saying anything yet.

      Yeah a million people sounds like overeager (VERRRRY) estimating.

      > Perhaps you could have posted a link to these supposed photos?

      Gee, if they've been confiscated & removed from the servers... NO, HE CAN'T!

      > A police officer's job is stressful enough without having his/her house being a target of some asshole or paranoid schizophrenic who think's he's saving the world by harrassing your kids and your home.

      A Protester's job is stressful enough without having a police officer bash his head in because he happened to be within a mile of some violence, much of which, I have no doubt, is precipitated by officers -- they may not even know it (but likely, do). And you want to talk about paranoid assholes? That's the definition of the common police officer!

      > where are these supposed mirrors?

      That's better than asking for a link to the originals...

      > we'll never know whether he's telling the truth or he's making up most of this to gain notoriety.

      And we'll never know if you are being an upstanding citizen by debunking his bullshit (which much of it probably is, if not all), or if you're just complaining that his opinion and experiences are different than yours.

      My point is that just replying and saying "you are wrong, you are wrong, you are wrong," without proof of that is not doing anyone any good, and is probably bad for your health. :) But in your defense, anectodat evidence isn't really evidence, even if true. I'm sure there's a way to manipulate the story as presented to make the actions of the police seem justifiable, although I am not a writer, so I can't think of one.

    2. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > anectodat

      Wow, I slaughtered that one... "anecdotal"

    3. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by aricusmaximus · · Score: 1
      Gee, if they've been confiscated & removed from the servers... NO, HE CAN'T!

      Yes, he could have posted previous links. Then I could have gone to the wayback machine and checked for the posts.

      But, no one, not even Indymedia has claimed that any information was removed from the servers (they just say that they're treating them as if they've been "hacked"). So what gives you the right to say the photos were confiscated?

      My point is that just replying and saying "you are wrong, you are wrong, you are wrong," without proof of that is not doing anyone any good, and is probably bad for your health.

      You're putting words into my mouth. I never said he was lying (look over my post again), and except for not liking his comment about posting the police officers personal information, I never disagreed with what he was saying.

      The reason I posted was because:

      (1) He posted a juicy story with absolutely no evidence to back it up. In fact, I'd like to believe his story -- but of course he provides no way for me to find corroborating postings or evidence. Silly me for wanting to dig further, I guess.

      (2) It pissed me off further to realize people moderated his post up as informative, when it contains absolutely no information and not a single damn thing to back up Mr. Max von H's statements. Just because you'd like to believe his story (who wouldn't? Heroic protesters fighting against the oppressive regime) doesn't give you an excuse to turn your brain off.

      I'm sure there's a way to manipulate the story as presented to make the actions of the police seem justifiable, although I am not a writer, so I can't think of one.

      ...assuming that the police actually acted the way this Max Von H. said.

      At best, Mr. Max is lazy and irresponsible for not providing useful links or anything to back up some very serious charges. At worst, he's a popularity seeking liar. Given the fact that Mr. Max has provided no counter-argument, I'm starting to believe the latter.

    4. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by Max+von+H. · · Score: 1

      There's absolutely no reason to believe you.

      Well, I happen to live in Geneva and, like it or not, one couldn't possibly avoid being in the demonstration at some point for it's quite a small town and it was blocking most of the downtown area for almost a week. The demonstration was against a G8 summit taking place in Evian, France, but the French authorities had tightly locked the whole place and no demo could take place there. Geneva being very close and a much bigger city than Evian, the bulk of the demo took place here. At some point there was a HUGE cross-border walk and I can assure you there were LOTS of people, for this summit was highly impopular due to the presence of Bush and Blair who are frankly hated here. Imagine a 10 miles long procession of peaceful protesters.

      I took many photos - which are not online at the moment - but will gladly send you some should you request them and prove me you're not working for any government. Given the present censorship atmosphere in here, I'd rather not have them visible to all on a swiss-hosted server.

      No, not funny. A police officer's job is stressful enough without having his/her house being a target of some asshole or paranoid schizophrenic who think's he's saving the world by harrassing your kids and your home. That's juvenile bullshit.

      I think it's our duty as citizens to point at cops when, instead of doing their jobs properly, they start behaving like the ones they're supposed to arrest, even encouraging such conducts. These cops believe they can do whatever they wish and get their orders from a well-know right-wing Distict Attorney with no sympathy whatsoever for the anti-globalization movement. Several of Geneva's elected representatives (wearing OBSERVER vests in the demo) got gased and shot (with rubber bullets) and then procecuted for "encouraging civil unrest". Neo-Liberals used these events to undermine left-wing political parties ever since, dissing the fact the police had been terribly mismanaged and abusive in its response. Furthermore, the only cops who worked properly were German riot-cops "hired" by our authorities because no other state in the country agreed on helping our stupid local police force (nice feeling of national unity here...), whose commander declared he had never seen poorer management and judgement from local authorities ever.

      Oh really, where are these supposed mirrors?

      Here's one of many

      And here's some sites with lots of photos from the events:

      here and here (in French).

      Proof?
      This guy may be telling the truth, or he could be making up 95% of this. Unfortunately, Mr. Max Von H.'s post is so lacking in substance that we'll never know whether he's telling the truth or he's making up most of this to gain notoriety.


      Well I hope I've managed to dissipate some of the doubt that seems to overcome every one of your brainfarts. I suppose you've never found yourself demonstrating for or against anything in your life, only to find some hysterical cops firing at you as an answer.

      You're a Bush supporter, aren't you?

      --
      -- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
    5. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > people moderated his post up as informative, when it contains absolutely no information and [no evidence]

      That I completely agree with. It could be considered "Interesting," even as a short story, but informative is a stretch, yes.

      You are right that I made you seem to be saying things you did not, I apologize. And no, Indymedia didn't say that anything was removed, but unless they had something like an MD5 sum of the entire hard drive, they can't be sure until they have enough time to review the whole thing.

      > At worst, he's a popularity seeking liar.

      Yeah, that's likely, but I can't say for sure.

    6. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by aricusmaximus · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the affirmation and the (wow!) apology (pretty rare on Slashdot!).

      I guess I'm lucky I was allowed to rant and did not get modded down for being flamebait.

      Regarding the drives, it's very likely that they simply made a copy of the drive for forensic evidence. Deleting files and/or placing back-doors or spyware, while possible, is unlikely; see Suwain's post. Nevertheless Indymedia is taking the appropriate attitude of assuming the boxes have been hacked, and the EFF is doing the right thing by defending them against what's possibly illegal intimidation tactics.

      Take care. :)

    7. Re:Pro-riot propaganda by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > apology (pretty rare on Slashdot!).

      Yeah, and pretty rare from me :) but sometimes I see, after the fact, how the "anonimity" and instantaneous nature of /. can lead me to say some pretty stupid things.

  120. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by ynohoo · · Score: 1

    since the days of Maggie Thatcher, I've often thought that ineffectual government can be alot less damaging that strong leadership. So Kerry doesn't have to do anything, and he'd still be a better leader than Bush.

  121. Link to original photos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/mtoups/nantes/copsi nnantes.htm

  122. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    even plain old boring conscientious stewardship of the duties of the Presidency would place him miles above Bush in terms of qualifications & stature

    So why the hell won't he campaign on that? Why aren't his supporters talking about that? To me that's a pretty damn big reason to consider Kerry, but NO! The Dems have to keep talking about Bush! They could have nominated a nudibranch and the campaign rhetoric would have been identical.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  123. Boycott Rackspace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  124. Re:More importantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proof of torture at Gitmo? I would venture that some of the people being detained are probably living better, with access to medical care, food, clothing, etc... than they had in Afghanistan. I think one of them even said so to the press when he was released. Not that that makes jail a fun place, but these people were trying to kill our troops in Afghanistan and they are being treated better than the people in Iraq who are having their heads removed with a butcher knife while two accomplices hold them down.

  125. I've just written to my MP... by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 2, Informative
    I've just written to my local Member of Parliament, Peter Duncan (Conservative), the following letter:

    On Thursday of last week, two computers belonging to an organisation called 'Indymedia' were removed from the premises of a London ISP, Rackspace, apparently by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation, allegedly following a request by the Swiss government. Further detail of this action may be found here: <URL:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3732718 .stm>

    I should be grateful if you could ask the Home Secretary:

    1. On what legal theory was it proper for the agents of one foreign power, whether or not acting at the behest of another foreign power, to seize property within the United Kingdom?
    2. What UK court, or other UK legal authority, authorised this seizure?
    3. If it is the case that the seizure was made under the 'Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty', what terrorist information was supposed to have been held on these computers?
    4. What evidence of such supposed terrorist information was supplied to the UK authorities in order to justify this seizure?
    5. What action is he taking to prevent such seizures or property by agents of foreign powers in future?

    This action cuts to the very heart of civil society in Britain: to the right of free speech, of citizens to publish news and opinion. Without this, democratic governance is impossible. For foreign powers to thus interfere in the democratic process in the United Kingdom is utterly intolerable, and wholly undermines the theory of a sovereign UK government.

    Yours sincerely

    It will be interesting to see whether I get a reply, and if so what reply I get. The more MPs are asking questions of the Home Office on this issue, the better, so if you're a UK voter, write to your MP. Obviously, don't copy my letter exactly, because the objective is to get them to understand a lot of different people are upset about this one.

    --
    I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  126. Re:Indy Media Watch by lewko · · Score: 1

    You were modded down because most other people on slashdot realize this.

    Hello Anonymous Coward,

    So what your saying is I was modded down because someone (one person, not most of Slashdot actually) disagreed with me. So they modded me down because they happened to have some mod points, rather than try and argue and attempt to disprove my point? Rather a weak way to win an argument don't you think? In fact, it means plenty of people won't get to see my argument and make up their own mind... Tell us the one about censorship!

    As for pro-terroristic rhetoric building on "actual negative conditions in people's lives" bear in mind the Ethiopians, the Tibetans, the Native Americans, the Australian Aboriginals and any number of massively oppressed, hungry, occupied NON-MUSLIM victims of poverty have NOT taken to suicide bombing or deliberate shooting of children.

    The difference, and the reason why is obvious and you are not arguing with what I said, but your own misinterpretation of it. Sorry Anonymous Coward, but hate is a major cause of terrorism (haev a look at what's shown on Arab Television if you don't believe me.

    If stopping hate or the incitement of children to kill and murder, leads to a reduction in terror, that's fine by me even if you (anonymous coward) believe it's censorship.

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  127. Re:Switzerland and Italy names and addressese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I looked at mirrors of photos. There are no names and addresses, even though various web pages claim there are names and addresses. If I am wrong, please post the names and addresses.

  128. Democracy vs republic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then there's an AC that reminds you that the difference between a Republic and a Democracy is enormous. For starters, there's the lack of mob rule (in theory) in the former, and the minority having effectively no voice in the latter.

  129. Re:I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by AoT · · Score: 1

    You made me giggle; that happens far too little here.

  130. Re:Indy Media Watch by wayward · · Score: 1

    I'm part of Urbana-Champaign Indy Media (http://www.ucimc.org). Thanks for your backhanded support, I guess. There's quite a variety of people in IMC, and some identify themselves as anarchists, socialists, libertarians, etc. I'd probably consider myself a Democrat, though I'm not heavily involved with the party.

  131. Re:Indy Media Watch by wayward · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry that you're unhappy about your post being modded down. The website is an open publishing newswire. As such, the quality of submissions varies widely. Moderators usually remove posts that violate policy, and users can always add comments to challenge or clarify posts. Our local IMC's print group produces a monthly paper, and the articles in there do go through a careful editing process because we care about producing material that is well-written and factually accurate.

  132. Yes, Democracy by alexo · · Score: 1

    > Really? I wasn't aware of any country in the world that was a democracy. Is everything put to a plebescite (sic)?

    Here's a relevant quote:
    By strict high school government class definition, the citizens of a "democracy" exercise power directly, whereas the citizens of a "republic" delegate power to elected representatives. This, of course, is easily the stupidest thing that we were taught in high school. They've taken a perfectly fine word like democracy and defined it so narrowly that it applies to absolutely no working government whatsoever. All they've left us is the word republic, which they've defined so broadly that it encompasses such diverse nations as the US, France, China and Iran -- and yet is still too narrow to include constitutional monarchies like Japan and Sweden.
    Here's what wikipedia says on "Democracy" versus "republic":
    The definition of the word "democracy" from the time of old Greece up to now has not been constant. In contemporary usage, the term "democracy" refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it be direct or representative.
    Also see the pages on varieties of democracy, representative democracy and republic.

  133. Proving a negative? by alexo · · Score: 1

    > I took many photos - which are not online at the moment - but will gladly send you some should you request them and prove me you're not working for any government.

    What would you consider a sufficient proof?

    And while we're at it, would you mind proving that you "are not working for any government"?

  134. What's wrong with the ./ moderated system by alexo · · Score: 1

    > I am spending my Slashdot Karma just to be able to voice my anger at this administration.
    >
    > They have made a pigs breakfast at everything from The economy, environment, egual rights, Civil Liberties.
    >
    > Not one fucking thing have they managed to succed in. Not ONE.


    Let's look at the moderation:
    I agree: FUCK Bush and Ashcroft on the 2'nd by bstadil (Score:5)
    Starting Score: 1 point
    Moderation +4
    30% Informative
    30% Underrated
    20% Offtopic
    Conclusion: 30% of the moderators cannot distingush facts from opinions.
  135. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No logs are kept for that reason. At best they can get a few public (not secret) keys, which don't matter because public keys are supposed to be public.

  136. Re:Nope by hesiod · · Score: 1

    Duh, I'm a dolt, of course they aren't kept there.

  137. Sounds like a job for ***I2P*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I2P is making progress and works faster and better then Freenet. There is no 'routing' times, as soon as you turn on I2P it works, and fast.

    Many of the people who were on Freenet or worked for Freenet are now on I2P. There is cross talk between these two groups as they both have channels on IIP/I2P anonymous chat on freenode.net. Drop on by #I2P , #I2P-Chat or #Freenet to take a look.

  138. MASSAGE THERAPY CLINIC LONDON THAI MEDICINE HEALTH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.centrallondonmassage.co.uk W1 Massage Therapy Central London West End UK http://www.centrallondonmassage.me.uk W2 Paddington Therapeutic Massages Alternative Therapies London http://www.centrallondonmassage.org.uk W3 Acton Complementary Health Clinic London http://www.eastlondonmassage.co.uk E1 Eastern Medicine London City of http://www.londonclinic.me.uk W4 Chiswick Health Clinic ME London http://www.londonmassagecentre.co.uk W5 Ealing Holistic Centre London UK http://www.londonmassagecentre.me.uk W6 Hammersmith Healing Massage London http://www.londonmassagecentre.org.uk W7 Hanwell Wellness Centre London http://www.londonmassageclinic.co.uk W8 Kensington Technique London Clinic http://www.londonmassageclinic.me.uk Thai Massage London Center W9 Maida Vale http://www.londonmassageclinic.org.uk W11 Notting Hill Alternative Health in London W10 http://www.londonmassagetherapy.co.uk W12 Shepperd's Bush Complementary Therapies London http://www.londonmassagetherapy.me.uk W14 West Kensington On Site Office Chair Massage London http://www.ilovemassage.co.uk
    http://www.ilovemas sage.me.uk http://www.ilovemassage.org.uk
    http://www.imassag e.info http://www.mywellness.me.uk
    http://www.therapeuti cmassage.info http://www.massageme.co.uk
    http://www.mymedicine. co.uk http://www.mytherapy.co.uk
    http://www.mylove.org. uk EAST ACTON SHEPPERDS BUSH CHISWICK HAMMERSMITH FULHAM SOHO WESTMINSTER NOTTING HILL GATE BAYSWATER QUEENSWAY HOLLAND PARK KNIGHTSBRIDGE PICCADILLY LEICESTER SQUARE GREEN PARK HYDE PARK EARLS COURT TURNHAM GREEN WC1 Euston Bloomsbury WC2 Holborn Covent Garden Strand Fitzrovia Mayfair Soho Chinatown SW1 Victoria Belgravia http://www.londonmassagetherapy.org.uk Massage Tables Couches Chairs UK MASSAGE THERAPY THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE THAI MASSAGE TRADITIONAL THAI MASSAGE INDONESIAN MASSAGE HAWAIIAN MASSAGE COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE HOLISTIC MASSAGE BOWEN TECHNIQUE BOWEN THERAPY CRANIOSACRAL THERAPY CRANIO SACRAL THERAPY LONDON THERAPIST THERAPISTS LONDON MASSAGE TREATMENT TREATMENTS LONDON MASSAGE http://www.londontherapist.me.uk Hawaiian Huna Bodywork London http://www.londontherapist.org.uk Healthy Massage Treatment http://www.massagecentrallondon.co.uk Lomi Lomi Kahuna Oil Massage http://www.massagecentrallondon.me.uk Holistic Therapists London http://www.massagecentrallondon.org.uk Craniosacral Therapy London http://www.massageclinic.me.uk Manual Lymph Drainage London http://www.massageclinic.org.uk Massage Experienced Qualified Insured London http://www.massagelondon-home.me.uk London Therapy at Home or Clinic http://www.massagelondon-home.org.uk Home Wellness London Therapy http://www.massagelondoncentral.co.uk Complementary Alternative Medicine West London http://www.massagelondononline.me.uk Generic Domain Names Google Ranked Sale http://www.massagelondononline.org.uk Info on Massage Equipment Sale UK http://www.massagelondonpage.me.uk Information Site about Massage Therapy London UK http://www.massagelondonpage.org.uk London UK complementary therapies massage http://www.massagelondonweb.me.uk alternative health London UK thai massage http://www.massagelondonweb.org.uk http://www.massagelondonwest.co.uk traditional thai indonesian massage therapy London http://www.massagenorthlondon.co.uk http://www.massagepractitioner.co.uk http://www.massagepractitioner.me.uk http://www.massagepractitioner.org.uk http://www.massagesouthlondon.co.uk http://www.massagetherapylondon.co.uk http://www.massagetherapylondon.me.uk http://www.massagetherapylondon.org.uk http://www.massagewestlondon.co.uk http://www.massagewestlondon.me.uk http://www.massagewestlondon.org.uk http://www.mybodywork.me.uk http://www.mybodywork.org.uk http://www.mylondonmassage.me.uk http://www.mylondonmassage.org.uk http://www.mymassagenow.me.uk http://www.mymassagenow.org.uk http://www.myrub.me.uk http://www.myrub.org.uk http://www.mythaimassage.me.uk http://www.northlondonmassa