Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Demands Logs From Radical Website

Posted by timothy on from the notoriety dept.

sunbird writes "The details are as yet unclear due to a gag order, but apparently the FBI is once again demanding IP logs from dissident webservers. The sysadmin for flag.blackened.net, best known for hosting infoshop.org and the Anarchist FAQ has responded to an FBI request for server logs. Although he cannot reveal the details of the request due to the gag order, the sysadmin has issued an informal press release discussing his reasons for turning over the information. Slashdot articles on similar topics: (1) (2) (3)"

39 of 884 comments (clear)

  1. /dev/null by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Our users have posted a total of 55265 articles. We have 1787 registered users

    I just can't understand why someone running what is apparently a popular site would ever keep logs for more than a very short amount of time?

    2. Comply with the wishes of the FBI, provide the IP addresses, and count on the fact that I will catch a lot of heat and hatred from my comrades in the anarchist movement worldwide.

    I'd comply and say that there are no log files as they are immediately dumped to /dev/null.

    Though it pains me to comply with the State in any manner, I have to choose option #2. The people who have foolishly compromised us all will shoulder the burden for their selfish actions. Frankly folks, they know better - we all know better.

    Running a website that is viewed as a "threat" to the government in which the servers reside should have taught the admin (Dave) to know better and not to keep logs of any kind past a short period of time (minutes?) so that a webstats program could be run and the data incorporated and then removed. I don't see why this wasn't followed. I mean my website only averages 1000 hits (not even unique visits) daily over a month and it takes webalizer about three seconds to do what it needs to do.

    But, the real point is that I feel like a coward and traitor to my comrades, even in the face of what is essentially a coerced decision. I'm the last one who will criticize or disagree with any of you who want to deride me. I'm also aware that this will probably cause quite a few of you to lose faith in me, flag, and it's subdomains. This can't be avoided and it's something I weighed into my decision.

    Oh it could have been avoided if the admin took the time to make sure that no such logs were being kept. They can only subpoena what physically exists.

    Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply.

    Someone that is so against government control and intrusion should have known that this inevitability would occur at some point. Why didn't they take the time to protect themselves especially when they (and/or their family) could be harmed by the very people they host discussions for who could become enraged by their actions?

    1. Re:/dev/null by El+Cubano · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply.

      Someone that is so against government control and intrusion should have known that this inevitability would occur at some point. Why didn't they take the time to protect themselves especially when they (and/or their family) could be harmed by the very people they host discussions for who could become enraged by their actions?

      Not only that, but did his site(s) get shutdown? My guess is that this currently an investigation in progress. If people start disappearing without due process or his sites are shut down, then he has a legitimate gripe. Contrary to popular belief, freedom of speech does not entitle you to say anything you want (e.g., threatening to kill someone, yelling fire! in a crowded building, etc.)

      We should reserve judgment until the details become available.

    2. Re:/dev/null by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We should reserve judgment until the details become available.

      I'm not judging anything other than his lack of foresight that got him into this mess in the first place.

    3. Re:/dev/null by El+Cubano · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not judging anything other than his lack of foresight that got him into this mess in the first place.

      Sorry, I should have been more clear. My last comment was directed at the collective-knee-jerk-reacting-slashbots that come frothing at the mouth to every YRO article. I agree that some questionable things have happened, but it is still too early to tell what is really going on in this case.

    4. Re:/dev/null by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a hugely naïve, and utterly wrong, position.

      Freedom is not absolute. It never is. The old saying that "your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face" is as good a way of explaining it as any.

      The freedom of speech is the most abridged freedom we have. There are lots of ways in which you don't enjoy the freedom of speech. You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets. You're not free to repeat somebody else's words without permission (with a few exceptions). You're not free to lie, in may cases; lying to deprive somebody of money or value is fraud, and lying to cause harm is slander.

      The freedom of speech is important, but like all freedoms it has to be balanced very carefully.

    5. Re:/dev/null by sfjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If people start disappearing without due process or his sites are shut down, then he has a legitimate gripe.

      Poorly thought out.
      If we wait until people start disappearing before we gripe, then by that time we won't be ALLOWED to gripe.

      --
      It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
    6. Re:/dev/null by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Next time try reading the post. What he's saying is that "freedom" is the wrong word to describe the situation we have. He's trying to divorce the connotation of "freedom = goodness", by saying that it's not actually achievable to have true freedom.

      --

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

    7. Re:/dev/null by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You're a moron.

      Thus does Slashdot discuss matters of social importance.

      The FBI could be interested in the logs for legitimate or illegitimate reasons. If they are investigating a crime and someone is known to have contacted the site then they have every right to demand the logs under the law.

      When I exchanged email with Timothy McVeigh before he murdered 300 people in Oaklahoma City I handed over the correspondence to the FBI as soon as I heard that he was a suspect. I would have handed them over to the FBI even earlier if I had thought they could take any action, the guy was a whacko.

      If on the other hand the FBI is just engaged in a fishing expedition looking for dissidents then there is a serious problem.

      The big problem with the actions of the administration is that it is very difficult to trust them when they say that their interest is of the first type rather than the second. The Attorney General has provided legal opinions to facilitate torture. 23 prisoners have died during interogation. The only criminal proceedings have been taken against low level grunts who are exceptionally unlikely to have re-invented procedures that exactly match the R2I protocol of their own accord.

      So instead of calling people morons or running around in tin foiul hats perhaps people should take note of the fact that yes there are real terrorists and no the administration does not have a clue how to deal with the problem. They have repeated every one of the mistakes that the British government made in Northern Ireland only on a much larger scale and to a much greater degree.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    8. Re:/dev/null by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And that doesn't even include the ridiculous practice of extraordinary rendition, which is effectively state-approved kidnapping and torture. I think it's totally ridiculous that the President has accrued the power to order these kinds of things, when it very clearly says in the Constitution that Congress shall have the sole authority to declare war. One can call our "police actions" by any name they care to, but if it involves members of the armed forces dying on a battlefield, it's war. The President is there to ensure the laws passed by Congress are executed, hence the term "executive branch", but nowadays the office seems to be one almost of royalty, with Congress only playing an advisory role at best.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    9. Re:/dev/null by teetam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And who exactly would do that "balancing"? The government? The first amendment (and in fact, the entire bill of rights) was written in to make sure the individual continues to be more powerful than the state. Years of kool aid has slowly eroded that and now, we have posts such as the parent. Your example of fist and face deals with how my rights can interfere with similar rights that you have (between two individuals). The situation here is totally different and involves the state and a website. The state has no "rights". The country is slowly turning into a police state, but it is being done using the "boiling a frog" process, so very few seem to notice it. We keep singing "home of the free" even after it has lost all meaning.

      --
      All your favorite sites in one place!
    10. Re:/dev/null by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See, one of the fundamental assumptions in our society is that the government is legitimate and that it obeys the rules set out for it. As long as that's true, the government should not be overthrown.

      The first thing you need to realize is that the people who created our government were smarter than you are. That's nothing to be ashamed of; they were smarter than I am, and smarter than everybody I've ever known. We're talking about once-in-a-millennium minds here.

      They concocted a system of government that works under all conditions, past or present. Our system of government has never yet failed. Even when we were in the darkest days of the civil war, when it seemed that our republic might fall, the government stood.

      Is it perfect? No. Nothing ever is. But when we become aware of its flaws, the intricate and complex system of checks and balances comes into play and sets things right. The system is self-correcting, and when you really understand it, it's a wonder to behold.

      So to answer your question, the government should not be overthrown. If circumstances ever did arise where it should be -- I'm not convinced that they will --then the question of whether it's legal to say so will be the least of your worries.

    11. Re:/dev/null by plague3106 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See, one of the fundamental assumptions in our society is that the government is legitimate and that it obeys the rules set out for it. As long as that's true, the government should not be overthrown.

      But its not, thats pretty clear to even most people.

      The first thing you need to realize is that the people who created our government were smarter than you are. That's nothing to be ashamed of; they were smarter than I am, and smarter than everybody I've ever known. We're talking about once-in-a-millennium minds here.

      I'd agree with that, and even they realized that sometimes violent revolution is the only way to fix things. Please note that I'm not saying thats even the case now...my point is that if its illegal to suggest it now it will be illegal to suggest it when it really needs to be.


      They concocted a system of government that works under all conditions, past or present. Our system of government has never yet failed. Even when we were in the darkest days of the civil war, when it seemed that our republic might fall, the government stood.

      That depends on how you define failure. If you mean its still here...then possibily you are correct. Some would argue however that our current gov't so so far out of tune with what was intended. Currently, we know it NOT to be following its own rules.


      Is it perfect? No. Nothing ever is. But when we become aware of its flaws, the intricate and complex system of checks and balances comes into play and sets things right. The system is self-correcting, and when you really understand it, it's a wonder to behold.

      Asking if its perfect is a waste of time; I think most reasonable people would agree you cannot attain perfection. The systems corrections seem to be failing however. This site provides some interesting insight. I've also had similar experiences in traffic court...I have an SSN and licence...but i know exactly what he meant when he said the judge railroaded it. I call traffic court McJustice. Also read his thoughts on case law (which isn't law at all...but judges seem to favor case law even though said cases may have been 'wrong' verdicts).

      So to answer your question, the government should not be overthrown. If circumstances ever did arise where it should be -- I'm not convinced that they will --then the question of whether it's legal to say so will be the least of your worries.

      I didn't ask if it should be now, or even talk about the US gov't. I said if there is one that SHOULD be, shouldn't the citizens be allowed to talk about it?

      You claim our system isn't perfect, yet then claim that it will never need to be overthrown. I suggest you look at history; all governments become corrupt and abusive, its just a matter of time. It naive to think that an imperfect government will last forever.

  2. Aww geez by winkydink · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The guy is a self-admitted left-extremist who refer to the FBI as the Gestapo.

    If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:Aww geez by grub · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response

      That's right. Be a good boy, don't speak out of turn and eat your vegetables.

      Calling the FBI "Gestapo" is just name calling. Big deal. Bush is a nazi, Blair is a cunt and the CIA are murderous thugs. It's not something they don't hear every day. They want something information that is tied to something more involved than simple name calling.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:Aww geez by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The guy is a self-admitted left-extremist who refer to the FBI as the Gestapo.

      If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

      Well, unless he actually did something, I'm pretty sure the US constitution used to uphold the rights of people to actually be whack-jobs and extremists.

      The fact that everyone should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response is a little chilling, because if he didn't actually do anything, Gestapo is a remarkably accurate word.
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Aww geez by slughead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

      Why?

      --
      Latewire
    4. Re:Aww geez by Moofie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, you should be able to speak your mind, as long as your ideas aren't "extreme"?

      I couldn't disagree with you more.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    5. Re:Aww geez by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 3, Insightful


      You're allowed to say extreme things.

      Yeah, you're right. You can say whatever you want, however, whatever you do say may not be protected by the freedom of speech - as with all laws, there a limits to this. And with laws come consequences for violating them.

      Another thing people may be overlooking is that now more than ever, anarchist groups and other "radical" organizations can now be filed under the heading "terrorist groups" (and you know, maybe they should be?) and they can be acted against.

      How do you distinguish between the freedom of speech and violation of law? Where is the line drawn? Is it when you go from saying the government should be overthrown to actually trying to overthrow a government? What about all the "speech" and "expression" in between? Marches or handbooks on how it COULD be done? Does it cross the line when training camps are set up? When it spreads from a small group of people to a large mass? When people start arming themselves? Participating in violent demonstrations?

      --
      R(k)
  3. And? by Telastyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So what? If I owned a little deli, and had a security camera, are those tapes safe from subpeona? If I ran a little telecom, would the phone lines be safe from wiretap orders?

    Why should server logs be any different?

  4. Gag orders should have expiration dates. by ka9dgx · · Score: 5, Insightful
    All "gag" orders should have an expiration date. Once the date is passed, the order, the reasons for the order, and all relevant data should be made public. The expiration date should be public, regardless.

    That's my armchair proposal for a better America.

    --Mike--

  5. Whirrr! by geekwithsoul · · Score: 3, Insightful
    . . . sound of the Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves.

    One has to wonder what would have happened if the British had such draconian measures in place say around the 1770s. Would they have locked up Ben Franklin for printing Thomas Paine's "Common Sense," and "The Rights of Man?"

    Any regime (which is what the current administration has turned into) that cannot allow free speech should not be allowed to stand. Or at least I believe that's what Patrick Henry might say in this situation.

  6. No it's not that by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Notice they aren't after him, they just wants logs about others that have come there.

    The problem is, with extremist sites like that, you'll get some who are a little more extremist than most. Maybe you are a group of anarchists that really do believe in no government. You believe in real, total anarchy. However, you don't believe in using violence to being that about, you aren't THAT extreme. Government will leave you be, you aren't breaking any laws.

    Well guess what? Sooner or later someone who IS extreme to the point that they want to use violence will show up. That will draw the intrest of the government. It is illegal to try to violently overthrow the government, make no mistake.

    Well if noe or more of these people hangs around your site, you shouldn't be supprised if the government wants information on them.

    Now maybe this is just harassment by the FBI, but I'd actually bet not. There are plenty of sites out there that are anti-government. I'm betting this is a real request to try and find some people for an investigation. Maybe it's just fishing, but still. The operators drama aside, it sounds like all they did was ask for the IPs that are behind some posts. I don't really see the problem.

    1. Re:No it's not that by Jardine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is illegal to try to violently overthrow the government, make no mistake.

      Only if you fail.

  7. Gag orders by slavemowgli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, what actually worries me more than the FBI's asking for server logs is the fact that (seemingly) every time something like this happens, a "gag order" is placed on the affected parties. It's a serious breach of the constitutional rights people enjoy; not only the right to free speech is affected, but also things like due process. A state which gathers evidence in secret is well on its way to a state that holds trials in secret, and THAT certainly is something none of us (here on Slashdot, anyway) want, no matter how we may disagree on other matters.

    And of course, there is the fact that (like always) there does not even seem to be a good reason to place a gag order, short of "people aren't gonna like this and we want to avoid bad press"; I can see why the FBI wants to err on the (for them) "safe" side, but I think it's a dangerous path to take, for the reasons described above.

    Oh well. I guess it just shows again that as a webmaster, you should not keep logs for longer than is absolutely necessary, and that as a user, you should use Tor or a similar tool to anonymise your browsing if you're visiting political websites (I wonder if Slashdot counts as one).

    --
    quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    1. Re:Gag orders by Rakishi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm sure criminals would just love to have the FBI tell them before hand that they are being investigated so that they can destroy all evidence.

  8. Re:Press Release by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hello, Dave.

    If the FBI served a court order (subpoena) then not to comply might be considered contumacious conduct warranting, say, up to 18 months in jail. Note that a court would impose this, not the FBI.

    If I were you I would not worry about being assassinated since if you flout the law then you will be doing it to yourself.

    Even if your attorney says to do what the FBI says, i.e., roll over, at least you will serve as a warning to others of the danger of keeping unnecessary records.

    Besides, if you make a prominent warning that you do not keep records, then you will be far less likely to attract a subpoena in the first place.

    Also when dealing with any federal official, please remember that even not under oath, you break the law if you misrepresent a material fact to them. Of course this does not apply to them lying to you, which they may do freely.

  9. Re:Press Release by Suicyco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Right on there. "Though I pretend to be an anarchist and revolutionary, I am really a scared sheep like the rest of you and thought this was just a game. Whaaaaa."

    Why does he have to comply? rm -rf / the server and do your time pal. What a friggin pussy.

  10. The Soviet Union collapsed by tintruder · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Funny how the US was so against the Soviet Union on "Human Rights" grounds only a handfull of years ago...

    The objections?:

    -requirement for internal travel documents "your papers please"

    -"blacklisting" dissidents (no-fly list?)

    -secret searches (Brandon Mayfield in Portland?)

    -forced medical procedures (or lack of care)

    -voting irregularities

    -lack of "due process" (Guantanamo Bay, sending suspects to egypt for "questioning")

    -"watchers" at libraries, places of public assembly

    But these days, it seems the US government is a bigger violator of human rights than the soviets ever were. A noble experiment in democracy destroyed by an arrogant few who have constructed a system to protect themselves and their petty fiefdoms from the citizenry who demand accountability.

    Where I used to be a flag-waving patriot when I was a USMC Fighter Pilot, I no longer feel that way. I look at our own government as more dangerous than Saddam Hussein, Osama BinLaden, North Korea, Iran and the rest.

    I look at virtually every government project in the same way I look at Saddam's statues of himself...an exercise in self-aggrandisment for those behind the project, that if it benefits even a single citizen, it's by accident, not by intent.

    I almost believe the "conspiracy theorists" who claim that the government knew about Oklahoma City and 9-11 ahead of time....because if the terrorists had instead hit Congress, the FBI, the IRS and the Supreme Court, it would be hard to rally people against them. They could have killed 2 birds with one stone.

    It really is sad to think this nation has deteriorated so far and that citizens have allowed their rights to be eroded to such an extent that they have all but been rendered incapable of making any meaningful change in government short of violence.

    Russia today is stunning proof that the crooks and gangsters are more honest and reliable than the politicians. Maybe we need a dose of their sort of revolution in this country?

    If something doesn't happen here, instead of being like 1970s Soviet Union, US citizens will end up being treated by this government like jews in 1940's Germany. Other than the ovens, little separates us from that today.

    1. Re:The Soviet Union collapsed by twifosp · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Let me preface by saying, I don't agree with the grand parent's over exgeration of our current state of afairs. Yea, we're not as bad as 1930s and 1940s Germany or [insert evil government here]. But that doesn't mean that we're doing the best job we can. Just because we're doing it better than they did, doesn't excuse the mistakes that we [the country] commit.

      Oh yeah, the US government is killing away millions of people to further the cause of the state. The last time I checked, we were also annexing all our neighbouring countries to become more powerful. Am sure the Canadians are trembling in their shoes. Not to mention the fact that the US government is completely controlled by the military and is persecuting its citizens for not following its mandate. FYI - for all of the government's efforts, the judiciary still deems it illegal for the legislature to interfere. Despite everything, the "regime" that is currently in power was _democratically_ elected by the majority of Americans. Perhaps you may disagree with their decision or the methods they employ, however that does not mean it is not democracy.

      Kill one or millions. If you do it in the name of the state, it's wrong. And using the point that we democratically and majority elected the POTUS is pretty silly. Not even counting our hilariously poor voter turn out... You can make the point that most of the people who voted for Bush still think Iraq had connections with 911. Yea, so the majority of people are ignorant to facts and voted for the wrong person. Winning an election does not absolve the unethical tactics used to win.

      Papers? We don't need no stinkin' papers. I mostly agree here. In an ideal state, this wouldn't be a problem. It CAN be a problem when those papers are prone to mistakes and don't even work to keep the wrong people out. See 911.

      FYI - these things have been happening for all of time. It's only that you hear more about them now with the new media. Just because you hear more about them does not mean that they didn't happen before.

      And the fact that it's been happening for years makes it A-OKAY? Well, murder has been happening since the dawn of humanity. Precendent has been set, kill away!

      Here's a little secret. Democracy doesn't really "work" - almost every American president other than Kennedy has been a White Christian Protestant Male. So much for diversity and blah blah blah. If democracy really did work, Joe Schmoe would be able to contest for elections and get elected. And if that were the case, you think the powers that be would really let that happen?

      Right. And we should just sit around and take it? What was that noise? Oh nevermind that, it was just ole Jefferson rolling in his grave.

      This has always been happening - WW2, Cold War and the like. And like I mentioned earlier, it's merely that you're hearing more about it now, that is all.

      Back to that precedent arguement! Hooray for previous crimes paving the way for a future of non improvement and continued injustice!

      I like how your basis for refuting the point includes comparisons to bigger injustices. When you got in trouble as a kid, you probably would bring up the vase your sister broke last week, wouldn't you.

      Well, we have the technology that makes this possible quite easily. In time, we'll also develop means of overcoming such "watching" - through other technologies. Remember - whatever happens, the majority of the people asked for it. The state is what the people want it to be.

      Err... no. Whatever happens, the majority of the people didn't know about it. Largely due to apathy and ignorance. But also due to the fact that when it happens, it's also too late. The state of the people is hardly ever what they want it to be. The state is ONLY what the people accept it to be.

  11. Hard to decide without details by gbulmash · · Score: 4, Insightful
    First... IANAL.

    Because of the gag order, it seems he can't say what the people whose IP addresses the FBI is demanding did.

    I've said it before in a previous post and I'll say it again. "freedom of Speech" is not absolute. Just check your local noise ordinances or "disturbing the peace laws". Let's not forget the following forms of illegal speech...

    • Inciting to riot
    • Deceptive or false advertising
    • Terrorist threats
    • Slander/Libel (more a civil matter, but still...)
    • Obscenity

    It's sad that this guy is the one who has to pony up info to the FBI, in violation of his principles, but the safe harbor laws only extend so far. Just because he is granted certain protections from legal liability over what happens in his public forum, that does not mean he is exempt from subpoena to turn over information about them if they should do something illegal in his public forum.

    Now, if the gag order comes off, and the matter seems totally spurious, then it seems more like harrassment by the FBI. But if what these users did was pretty f'ed up, then such is life. Responsibility goes hand in hand with rights and privileges.

    - Greg

    --
    Start a happiness pandemic
  12. Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity by SquadBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fine then. They would be siezed and searched and nothing found. Granted since said servers are /.ed to hell and back and the moment I only have a bit of info but let's play thought experiment for a minute. And list the basic rookie mistakes this guy and his lusers made.

    1. He kept logs. Nuff said.

    2. Given as upset as he expects them to be we can only conclude that they were coming from tracable IPs. Good god welcome to fucking amatuer hour.

    3. WTF was he doing keeping the servers *in* the US. As someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and who really thinks that that American Revoultion was one of the best things to ever happen to mankind is sickens me to say this. But the US is rapidly descending into totalitarianism. If you think about it for about .3 seconds you come to the conclusion that you should seek hosting in another country, by prefrence one that has no extradition treaty.

    4. The fucking idiot was *KEEPING LOGS*. There is no possible way to justify this.

    He likely sits with his back to doors.

    --

    Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
  13. We do not live on a playground by Coulson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We do not live on a playground. Freedom of speech is not something that exists only in the sandbox. When we say something really mean, the state is not a watchful parent who should step in and pull us aside for a stern talking to.

    That's the attitude a lot of people seem to take. "Oh, they were playing for real, so the FBI had to make them stop."

    Liberty is either respected or it is not. The realpolitik guys will say "only when it's expedient". The libertarians will say, "all the time regardless". The Democrats and Republicans will say, "as long as you play nice", and that's the government we've got.

    The government has to follow the rules all the time. They can't break them just because we're playing "for keeps"*.

    *though of course actually they can, and do, and people expect them to. so they'll keep doing it.

  14. Re:Black Flag by hkb · · Score: 3, Insightful


    So he believes in working within a system he doesn't believe should exist? While I understand that anarchists can have moral beliefs I just can't imagine that he would be so tolerant of the way the system is built to just put up with it.

    On the other side of the coin, because of his beliefs, he MUST hold those beliefs above his wife and daughter and sacrifice everything?

    My two cents: STFU and mind your own business.

    --
    /* Moderating all non-anonymous trolls up since 2004 */
  15. Re:Press Release by Suicyco · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not so. Disks are never allowed to leave classified areas in my experience, without physical destruction. They are wiped per DOD prior to leaving the project, and destroyed (melted down) prior to leaving the site. You NEVER return hardware to manufacturers in classified situations.

    The DOD writes are not sufficient, there are ways to retrieve data from drives written over 10 times and more, its just prohibitively expensive and very very time consuming.

    I agree the "press release" sounds like a crock of shit. You know, I bet this guy is LOVING this right now. I mean, here he is, living his dream! FBI, secret info, cloak and dagger WOOO HOOOO!! Its every internet revolutionaries dream to ACTUALLY be involved in something.

  16. Re:Press Release by Suicyco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ahh. So don't actually stand up for something. You aren't sticking it to the man by going to jail, but you may be sticking it to the man if you go to jail because you will not divulge information the man wants.

    What does "push as far as you can as long as you can" mean? Only until you wimp out?

    If you are advocating violent overthrow of a government, you sure as shit better be able to withstand the reverse. Giving up under pressure is how the status quo is maintained.

  17. Re:Press Release by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am really a scared sheep like the rest of you

    Only three types of people don't feel "scared"...

    Those beyond punishment (usually already so far gone that anything further would only grant them release - Or gods)...

    ..Those too stupid to realize their danger...

    ... Or those who think the enemy of us all takes sides and will protect them.


    The rest of us, the sane common folk, may fall anywhere in the political spectrum. But we ALL realize that fucking with "The Man", whether you believe in "The Man" or not, will cause us grievous harm.


    I strongly sympathize with this poor bastard. I may chide him for not having his logs on a 72-hour regular deletion schedule (or even more often, considering the type of sites he hosted), but I still feel bad for the poor bastard. "A rock and a hard place" has no more physical embodiment than an FBI (or "insert your nation's "law" upholding body here") order to violate your own beliefs.


    Why does he have to comply? rm -rf / the server and do your time pal.

    Do you have any idea how much power US judges have?

    "Do your time" for violating a court order could well mean (and has meant) life in prison without your "crime" ever going to trial, and no possibility of parole.

  18. Hard to know because of gag rule by Wesley+Everest · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The reason it is "still too early to tell" is because of the gag rule. That's the problem with "anti-terrorism" laws that throw our rights out the window. The government violates people's rights, and if anyone gives details about it they go to jail.

    In a free and democratic society, if the government violates your rights, you can go to the press to draw attention to the issue. You are also allowed to give enough information so that people can come to their own conclusions.

  19. Re:Press Release by GeoGreg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Unless you haven't been paying attention, American prisons are centers of torture and death. Not white-collar country clubs like Martha went to, but the real prisons that are run by the Aryan Brotherhood, Mexican Mafia, etc. I'm sure that the powers-that-be could get one of the gangs to get rid of anyone that they didn't like.

    Secondly, this man has a wife and child. Have you ever heard the maxim "Choose your battles wisely"? Fighting this subpeona is almost certainly not going to cause the masses to rise up waving the black flag. What would be the better result: to go rot in jail leaving your family destitute, or to live to fight another day? Life is complex, and decisions aren't always easy. Anyone who says differently is trying to sell you something.

  20. Re:Press Release by Afty0r · · Score: 3, Insightful
    It goes without saying this wasn't a liscensed protest.
    The very thought of having to "license" a protest utterly, utterly sickens me. There is no way to pretend a country which requires government licensing before people can protest is in any way "free". Which country are you from?