Colocation Provider PRQ Raided; Wikileaks and Many Torrent Sites Offline

An anonymous reader writes with some chilling news about PRQ, the infamous colo founded by two Pirate Bay founders. From the article: "Stockholm police raided the free-speech focused firm (PRQ) Monday and took four of its servers, the company's owner Mikael Viborg told the Swedish news outlet Nyheter24. While a number of bittorrent-based filesharing sites including PRQ's most notorious client, the Pirate Bay, have been down for most of Monday as well as PRQ's own website, Viborg told the Swedish news site that the site outages were the result of a technical issue, rather than the police's seizure of servers." Torrentfreak is reporting that the Pirate Bay isn't using PRQ for anything important (if at all), and that their downtime is due to a faulty PDU that happened to fail as a coincidence.

Comments

same country that wants Assange just raided....

[davydagger]

Same Country that wants assange on funny smelling charges of "rape", just raided his server room.

Re:same country that wants Assange just raided....

[girlintraining]

This is part of the reason it is hard to take the whole "Assange is a persecuted martyr" seriously: his supporters never seem to know all the facts, they simply react. Knee-jerk reactions do not help, and make your entire position look bad.

Dude, you are smoking the cheap $3 Propaganda brand crack. Assange isn't a persecuted martyr because he's still breathing. He is being persecuted, however. The fact that he's a political figure simply can't be ignored or dismissed. You may agree or disagree with the charges. You may think he's an asshole, or the greatest thing since sliced bread. And we can argue the minutae of it until the heat death of the universe, but it's pointless. You and I are just random people on the internet. An embassy, a sovereign foreign government responsible for millions of lives, has come out and said "Something smells fishy about this." These aren't the kind of people to make rash decisions. You and I may not have all the facts. His supporters may or may not. But the embassy officials that put their country's pride and reputation on the line do have them. It would be reckless of them to have offered him asylum if they didn't feel there was firm ground to stand on. Remember -- The British government was inches away from wiping their arse with the Geneva conventions and storming the place, creating a massive international diplomatic incident... the kind of incident wars have been started over in years past.

The statement he isn't being persecuted is readily refuted by the simple observation that diplomats aren't irrational. It's a job requirement that they consider carefully the consequences of each action, and even in a small country there's going to be a vetting process to ensure that their interests are represented by someone who isn't nuts. Bottom line is he is being persecuted; You can agree or disagree with it, but you can't outright deny it. The evidence simply can't support your position.

All that said, let me step away from intellectual discourse now and say I think the man was a fucking moron. Who in their right mind moons the government with the largest standing military and biggest economy by GDP on the planet? I could give a flying fuck through a rolling doughnut about whatever charges they're bringing him up on, or the diplomatic incidents he's created -- the dumb bastard's gonna have his ass battered and deep fried at the end of this, one way or another. Maybe what he did was right, maybe it wasn't, but goddamnit man... if you're gonna shine the biggest badass in the room, at least be a man and take your lumps right then and there, not run off and hide under someone's skirt after.

*cough* We now return you to your regularly scheduled flame fest, already in progress...

Re:Free speech under attack.

[psiclops]

Because Abu Hamza [wikipedia.org] has only one country which has to approve his extradition (instead of two in the case of Assange), has few fans (compared to Assange, who according to polls has on the order of hundreds of millions), was trying to *set up terrorist training camps inside the US* (instead of leaking videos and cables), has no "get out of extradition free" card from being charged with an intelligence-related crime (Swedish law bans extradition for intelligence matters), and on and on... and he's *still* in the UK.

So your argument against the belief that he is only being extradited to Sweeden so that he can then be sent to the U.S. is to present evidence of how difficult is is to get someone extradited directly from the U.K to the U.S.?

And we're supposed to worry about Julian F'ing Assange and his paranoid fantasyland? Especially after this [guardian.co.uk]?

you're sourcing a news article that's nearly 2 years old. Try looking at what's being going on more recently. like Within the last week we have news that "THE US military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States - the same legal category as the al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban insurgency."

"Declassified US Air Force counter-intelligence documents, released under US freedom-of-information laws, reveal that military personnel who contact WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks supporters may be at risk of being charged with "communicating with the enemy", a military crime that carries a maximum sentence of death."

Re:Free speech under attack.

[evanism]

I don't think we have ever been really free, at least in a modern sense.

I suspect the early Picts, Vikings and other tribes had significantly more freedom than we have today.

We live in a pervasive information society, one where the government is the biggest customer and companies are all too happy to sell our data to it.

Our grandchildren will piss on our graves for what we have allowed.