Slashdot Mirror
EFF, ACLU Back WikiLeaks
souls writes "Seems like the forces to protect freedom-of-speech in the groundsetting Wikileaks.org case have spoken: Henry Weinstein at LA Times reports that a coalition of media and public interest organizations today urged judge Jeffrey White to rescind the shutdown of Wikileaks.org, which presents 'restraint on free speech that violated the First Amendment,' and is generally considered to become a representative case for free online speech.
The dirty dozen organizations fighting for your voice and mine include the EFF, the ACLU, The Times, AP, Gannett, Hearst, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and the Society of Professional Journalists. Lets hope that is enough muscle to stop a judge running wild in favor of a bunch of offshore bankers!
Meanwhile wikileaks is still going strong via all available other domains, and is currently organizing support and donations."
UCLA != ACLU
during times of war or when a threat of national security is imminent. wikileaks poses a threat to national securtiy and should be shut-down
In Soviet Halo, the game kills you (socially anyway)
Of course UCLA = ACLU.
This message is brought to you by the DNA ( National Dyslexic Association )
* Carthago Delenda Est *
What did bother me was how Dynadot just rolled over and took this without batting an eye. They simply complied and let it happen without bother to contest it. Is it possible for wikileaks to get wikileaks.org changed to another domain registrar or should they just jump ship from this spineless drone?
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
WTF is "ground setting? *&$^#% editors...oh, wait, this is /.
Nevermind.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
Q: How do you identify a dyslexic, agnostic insomniac?
A: They lie awake at night, wondering whether there's a dog.
(This joke was brought to you by the Society for the Perpetuation of Misunderstandings of Dyslexia.)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
No, let's hope it isn't. I'm not saying I think wikileaks should be shut down. I'm saying that I loathe the notion that what it takes to get it back up is "muscle". I hope the wikileaks suppression order is rescinded because of sound legal arguments.
You must be new here.
Not to slashdot, but to THIS PLANET. Here, we follow the Golden Rule: he who has the gold, rules. The US Constitution, the Magna Carta, all those other lovely documents all over the world were written with one purpose in mind - to give you the illusion of freedom while your collar remains firmly around your neck and chained to the grindstone so you can generate more wealth for the people that actually matter. The Gatses and Ellisons and Hiltons and Trumps own and rule the world, and if you believe otherwise you've bought into the illusion they want you to keep.
Make no mistake about it, the laws you must abide by can be safely ignored by them. They can change those laws if they want to; you never will. They own the media and the governments and they will convince you that the boot on your head is a good thing and you will clamor for another stomping from them.
Who should you vote for next election? It doesn't matter, all the candidates are owned by the same people. None of "your" representatives actually represent you.
The only thing I can't figure out is why they let the internet happen. Seems like a really bad move on their part; now I have a voice.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Still there at
http://88.80.13.160/wiki/Wikileaks
Their DNS is, of course, another question.
The only thing I can't figure out is why they let the internet happen. Seems like a really bad move on their part; now I have a voice.
I can think of two possibilities with respect to your worldview. Either they don't have the kind of control you think they do, or it's really a grand distraction to make you think you have a voice when you really don't have one at all.
No doubt I'll get modded down for defying the slashmind groupthink but the problem I have with WikiLeaks is their cavalier disregard of accountability.
They have ignored court orders. They publish whatever they like and people seem to automatically assume that everything they say is the absolute truth, despite they having no credible track record. WikiLeaks is not a wiki in the true sense, there is no collaboration, the only people allowed to post are their little Cabal. Wikipedia, despite it's problems allows people to challenge its decisions in a publicly accountable way.
I think WikiLeaks are manipulative and deliberately courting controversy. Dig beneath the surface and all I see is another self appointed authority with a poor regard for balance.
1.) No site was shut down. The IP address that is quoted so often is the same server as the one wikileaks.org pointed to.
2.) If any DNS provider wanted to point wikileaks.org at its actual IP address rather than behaving like a good DNS and pointing it where its registrar says it should point, they could (I'm a bit shaky on the technical aspects, but this is after all how pharming works, so it's possible).
3.) I am principally opposed to hijacking domain names like this, and so should everyone who cares about a reliable internet. If we can't trust DNS servers to return the proper zone records, we are in very deep crap, technologically. This is just short of what Pakistan did with Youtube, and of cutting deep-sea cables - Don't Mess With The Internet. I know the centrally regulated names and numbers thing has its drawbacks at times, but it beats all-out anarchy.