Slashdot Log In
Indymedia Server Raided by FBI
Posted by
samzenpus
on Thu Oct 07, 2004 04:45 PM
from the need-to-know-basis dept.
from the need-to-know-basis dept.
jaromil writes "Today at about 18:00 CET FBI raided the indymedia servers hosted by Rackspace both in US and England. At present, the italian indymedia and numerous other local IMC websites are obscured, while the reasons why the hard drives were taken are still unknown."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Nothing known, but political motivation possible (Score:5, Informative)
Nobody's exactly sure why or how the FBI got warrants to take Indymedia's HDs, but their speculation tends to center around the fact that the Feds were spooked by the fact that Indymedia was able to publish RNC delegate names. This unfortuantely means political motivations are going to be questioned no matter what reasoning is brought forward.
Not much we can do at this hour but hold our breath and wait for more info to be released.
Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah that freedom of speech thing is a real pain, isn't it?
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
...which was already publicly released elsewhere. If you are going to take down the caches of "private" information that was previously published for all to see, then there are a lot of Google cache servers that the FBI needs to seize.
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
In australia, a typically pro-us country, my grandfather told me that he cant remember a less liked us president. Nixon was kinda up there tho.
Not to put too fine a point on it. George bush is ONLY loved by about half the us population and almost none of the worlds population.
But you get that when your foreign policy is "Fuck the earth".
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
You are confused (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm... I'm gonna go out on a limb here.
Perhaps it has something to do with the reasoning behind the publication, and the history of those who publish this information.
Let's look at the history first.
Liberal activists are not exactly known for being the militant types (just ask any Republican), and are more often than not pigeonholed as hippies, peaceniks, treehuggers and even cowards by the more militant right wing.
Anti-abortion groups on the other hand have a long history of stalking the doctors who perform abortions, which very often leads to physical violence. Many abortion doctors have been murdered for doing their jobs. I don't think a delegate has ever been given so much as a black eye.
Next, let's consider what the reasoning is for the publication in each instance?
When an anti-abortion group publishes the names and addresses of private citizens (doctors), they usually follow it up with "make sure they get the message" or "do what you have to to help save another fetus".
For the most radical of those groups, that can be a very dangerous proposition.
When activists publish the names of delegates which are pledged to their opponent, who are constitutionally not supposed to be secret anyway, they're doing so in order to make sure their supporters use letters and phonecalls to put pressure on them to do what the activists consider to be the right thing, whatever it is.
Now, if you keep these two things in mind:
1) the identities of delegates are not secrets and in an open government that information must remain in the public domain.
2) the intent of the activists is not violence, but peaceful communication.
Compare that with:
1) the identities of doctors are private, although they can be found if you take the time to look for them.
2) the intent of the activists is not peaceful communication, but prevention at all costs.
With those things in mind, I see plenty of reasons as to why publishing the names of delegates should NOT be considered a threat of any kind. In fact, I believe it is protected by the first amendment.
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Informative)
Except for when they shoot up Republican campaign offices [usatoday.com] and burn swastikas in Republicans' yards [channel3000.com]...
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I don't assume, when I hear of another abortion doctor being killed execution-style, that 'Republicans' in general are responsible. It's a lunatic fringe, who have as much right to call themselves Republicans as I have to call myself a martian. When I talk about Republicans did this and Republicans did that, I don't include things that the Republicans can't be proven to have done, and that most Republicans would be deeply ashamed of.
And, amusingly, neither do most other Democrats that I know of. They accept that mainstream Republicanism isn't all about shooting abortion doctors. But then, when some whacko drives by a RNC HQ and shoots at it, not only do the Republicans start yelling at the Democrats about it, as if Kerry somehow planned it, but you actually start hearing Democrats apologizing, as if they thought they were actually responsible!
Puh-leeze. Catch the bastards and get on with life, and don't tell me I'm responsible for their stupidity. (Well, actually, I'm not a Democrat. I just agree with a whole lot more of their platform than I do with the Republicans'.)
-fred
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
Given the demonstrated electioneering competency of the Democrats and Republicans in recent years, I would say that the above is actually the most likely explanation.
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Interesting)
And these "reports" of campaign HQ shootings: let's see some citations. You're not talking about the one attended by the serial baby-crying sign dropper, Republican agent provocateur, are you? If you really believe this crap, you better change the channel from Fox News, maybe go outside and talk to some humans. Maybe someone would explain you that "Communist blacklisting" was the rightwing authorities secretly locking out unpopular workers from legitimate jobs. Today, it's known as "no fly lists" and "terrorist watch lists", and "Florida voter purge lists" - all created by Republican authorities to suppress the fair representation of Democrats and other opposition to their fascism. That doesn't make their opponents communists.
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Interesting)
I live in New York City and that's the most ridiculous crap I've ever read. Many of my friend were arrested. Dozens if not hundreds of people I know were there. Dozens of New York City organizations representing thousands of people were there.
One of my friends were held (for well over 24 hours) with a family of French tourists who had made the terrible mistake of stepping out of their hotel while the police were rounding them up.
They were, apparently, very upset because they didn't speak English well and of course the police would not tell them what they were charged with -- or attempt to communicate with them in any way!
For some reason people think that the Republican National Convention somehow trumps the Constitution. I personally don't get it.
Parent
Re:Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press! (Score:5, Insightful)
(There are also reports of non-violent, LICENSED protesters being jailed for three days, then never charged with anything, just to keep them off the street while the RNC was in town. (And people who were just walking to the corner grocery store getting caught up and locked up along with them.) Which is illegal, but is something it looks like we're going to have to get used to.)Actually, there is one report of a campaign headquarters being shot at. Yes, a Republican campaign HQ, and yes, it is fairly well substantiated. It amazes me, because of course the dramatic majority of Democrats are pro gun-control. It looks like Rush -- er, that is to say, Bush -- has pissed someone else off besides the Democrats, eh?
One report of a Republican campaign headquarters being 'ransacked'. That is to say, someone broke into it and stole three laptops, possibly some office equipment, and possibly some money (this is in dispute). The assumption is, although the HQ was a juicy target and the laptops were out in plain sight, it must have been Democrats who did it. Well, possibly it was; it's hardly like the Democratic party can make any claims to sainthood, and I'd find it MUCH more likely that they'd stoop to stealing than they would attempt a drive-by shooting.
And the usual random assortment of graffiti, vandalism, and silliness on both sides. Which is almost certainly just drunk partisan college student asshats.
But hey, you notice that with the information out there, including names, addresses, phone numbers, and all that stuff, for all the RNC delegates... with the information STILL out there... with the information still out there and READILY AVAILABLE... there haven't been any serious incidents?
I mean, hell, if I were one of them, I would be terribly disappointed. 'What, am I not important enough for a few death threats?'Nope, that screaming would start when someone interviewed for a job and was told that they couldn't be hired because they were on 'the list'.
Lists of names don't kill people. People kill people. With guns and lists of names. Why do you want to outlaw the lists of names?
-fred
Parent
Re:Nothing known, but political motivation possibl (Score:5, Informative)
obody's exactly sure why or how the FBI got warrants to take Indymedia's HDs, but their speculation tends to center around the fact that the Feds were spooked by the fact that Indymedia was able to publish RNC delegate names.
Another theory is around some pictures of undercover Swiss police (photographing protesters) that were posted on an IMC site (IMC Nantes) - Indymedia got a request to remove 'identifying information' from the site (apparently the FBI got involved 'as a courtesy' to the Swiss authorities). Since there were no identifying details, Indymedia didn't do anything in response.
It would seem strange for an American agency to get a warrant to seize information relating to Swiss undefcover police from a French website, but it's the most solid theory I've heard so far.
Parent
Re:Nothing known, but political motivation possibl (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Hmph...well- (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04264/382137.stm [post-gazette.com]
This in from Argentina Indymedia, which has a different view -
FBI took the hard drives of IMC servers in the UK
por Mat ((!)) Thursday October 07, 2004 at 06:10 PM
-
The US authorities issued a subpoena to Rackspace's office in the US ordering them to physically remove Indymedia hardware located in London. Rackspace is one of Indymedia's web hosting providers with offices in the US and London. Rackspace complied and turned over Indymedia's hard drives/servers in the UK. This affects some 20+ Indymedia sites worldwide.
Since the subpoena was issued to Rackspace and not to Indymedia, the reasons for this action are still unknown to Indymedia.
At the same time a second server was taken down at Rackspace which provided streaming radio to several radio stations, BLAG (linux distro), and a handful of miscellanous things.
The last few months have seen numerous attacks on independent media by the US Federal Government. In August the Secret Service used a subpoena in an attempt to disrupt the NYC IMC before the RNC by trying to get IP logs from an ISP in the US and the Netherlands, last month the FCC shut down comunity radio stations around the US, and now the FBI is shutting down IMCs around the world.
The list of affected local media collectives includes Ambazonia, Uruguay, Andorra, Poland, Western Massachusetts, Nice, Nantes, Lilles, Marseille (all France), Euskal Herria (Basque Country), Liege, East and West Vlaanderen, Antwerpen (all Belgium), Belgrade, Portugal, Prague, Galiza, Italy, Brazil, part of the Germany site, UK Radio, and the global Indymedia Radio site.
Micah Anderson of the global imc-tech collective said, "We suspect it has to do with an FBI request that we take down a post on the Nantes IMC that had a photo of some undercover Swiss police. They claimed there was threats and personal information, but there was nothing of the sort. The undercover police that were photographed on the page were photographing protesters. Rackspace is a US company, but have colocation in the UK where these servers are (err, were) located. So this is about Swiss police, on a French site, on a server in England, taken away by American federal police."
However, according to information from IMC Nantes the pictures in question were already removed a week ago.
Link to Argentina Indymedia
http://argentina.indymedia.org/news/2004/10/22769
and one more to NYC Indymedia, which is still up
http://nyc.indymedia.org/ [indymedia.org]
Uh... huh... (Score:5, Insightful)
So don't give me this garbage about how I would feel. I don't like the idea that someone could post my address and phone number on the net so that a group of dicks could harass me, but I like even less this whole 'nanny state' censorship issue. And I hate the idea that something like this can be done for a reason that isn't even actually illegal. What's good for the goose is damn well good for the gander.
Now, that said, I think the likelihood that 'RNC' appears in any way on the warrant is vanishingly small. If, in fact, this is in retaliation for the RNC names thing, it's going to have some actual legal basis that is nearly or wholly unrelated.
(And may well be fictional.)
-fred
Parent
Fanatical Support™ (Score:5, Funny)
Raided? (Score:5, Funny)
Indymedia press release (Score:5, Informative)
7 October 2004
FBI Seizes IMC Servers in the UK
US authorities issued a federal order to Rackspace's office in the US ordering them to provide Indymedia's hardware located in London to the requesting agency. Rackspace is one of Indymedia's web hosting providers with offices in the US and London. Rackspace complied, without first notifying Indymedia, and turned over Indymedia's server in the UK. This affects some 20+ Indymedia sites worldwide.
Since the subpoena was issued to Rackspace and not to Indymedia, the reasons for this action are still unknown to Indymedia. Talking to Indymedia volunteers, Rackspace stated that "they cannot provide Indymedia with any information regarding the order." ISPs have received gag orders in similar situations which prevent them from updating the concerns parits on what is happening.
It is unclear to Indymedia how and why a server that is outside the US jurisdiction can be seized by US authorities.
At the same time a second server was taken down at Rackspace which provided streaming radio to several radio stations, BLAG (linux distro), and a handful of miscellanous things.
The last few months have seen numerous attacks on independent media by the US Federal Government. In August the Secret Service used a subpoena in an attempt to disrupt the NYC IMC before the RNC by trying to get IP logs from an ISP in the US and the Netherlands. Last month the FCC shut down community radio stations around the US. Two weeks ago the FBI requested that Indymedia takes down a post on the Nantes IMC that had a photo of some undercover Swiss police and IMC volunteers in Seattle were visited by the FBI on the same issue. On the other hand, Indymedia and other independent media organisations have been successful with their victories (thanks to the EFF), for example against Diebold and the Patroit Act. Today however, the US authorities shut down IMCs around the world.
The list of affected local media collectives includes Ambazonia, Uruguay, Andorra, Poland, Western Massachusetts, Nice, Nantes, Lilles, Marseille (all France), Euskal Herria (Basque Country), Liege, East and West Vlaanderen, Antwerpen (all Belgium), Belgrade, Portugal, Prague, Galiza, Italy, Brazil, UK, part of the Germany site, and the global Indymedia Radio site.
Maybe the FBI... (Score:5, Funny)
Not everything is a conspiracy.
Gag? (Score:5, Interesting)
Given that Rackspace seemed reasonably communicative about the Swiss Secret Service issue, I wonder if the "no comment" implies some invocation of the Patriot Act [aclu.org].
due process? (Score:5, Insightful)
now i'm no legal expert, but i was under the distinct impression that, with a few exceptions like threatening the president, you were innocent until proven guilty and had the right to defend yourself. have i missed something?
also by law aren't federal agents, any agents for that matter, required to show the warrant? so *some*body must know what's going on, right?
Re:due process? (Score:5, Insightful)
now i'm no legal expert, but i was under the distinct impression that, with a few exceptions like threatening the president, you were innocent until proven guilty and had the right to defend yourself. have i missed something?
Yes, you have missed something - the national security laws passed in the last few years.
Parent
Re:due process? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rackspace was given no time to defend against the order
How do you "defend" against something like that? You can't dispute a warrant/search order. When the cops show up with paper in hand, you don't get to say "Hey, wait a sec, let's talk this over." They have the warrant. Period.
you were innocent until proven guilty and had the right to defend yourself. have i missed something?
Just because they were searched doesn't mean they've been assumed guilty. (Guilty of what, I have no idea...) That won't be known until the evidence is assessed. And the evidence can't be assessed unless the government has access to it. That's sort of the point of a search order.
Unfortunately, as things currently are, the government can confiscate property under certain laws with no obligation to return it or provide compensation. Drug property forfeitures work the same way -- if you're suspected of transporting cocaine on your yacht, for example, you forfeit the yacht, even if it later turns out you were innocent of everything.
If I were Indymedia, I wouldn't count on ever seeing those hard drives, ever again.
It's the definition of "due process" which has been changing in recent years. The constitution says that we can't be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process, but that isn't clearly defined. And I definitely don't like the direction that definition is evolving toward...
Parent
Huge mistake by the feds. (Score:5, Insightful)
"They hate us for our freedom!" (Score:5, Insightful)
(No fair modding me down based on your warped "political" leanings...).
at what stage does identification become scary? (Score:5, Interesting)
if you stood outside the entrance, took photos of the people going in and published them, would that be the same thing? if its a public place whats the problem?
has there been intimidation? or is this just fear because its the republicans in power?
there are plenty if privacy concerns just by being a voter, your details are available to be seen locally (speaking as a UK citizen myself). and if you don't tick the right box then hell its available to anybody who wants it, anywhere, possibly for cross referencing with the phone book so burglars can find your phone number if if looks like you are out. well having a pretty rare name and being involved in something where a lot of people know i've got a load of expensive gear - i don't register to vote. I know people who have been repeatedly hit and vanloads of equipment nicked.
as another point, really is there any need to go? its on the telly. like all political conferances its just preaching to the converted and you are just there to applaud on cue to make the pictures look good.
some background (Score:5, Interesting)
See link [wired.com] for more info.
Right or wrong doesn't matter... (Score:5, Insightful)
Independant Media? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the National Post (rigidly right wing Canadian paper) will publish Linda McQuaig and others, why aren't there any divergent viewpoints on Indymedia?
The National Post. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Apples and oranges.
Indymedia definitely has an agenda. There is no question about this, and that agenda is to tell those stories which the National Post will never, ever touch. Linda McQuaig, as admirable as her socialist/Marxist thinking is, remains little more than a showpiece to give a lousy paper some legitimacy. (They call it, 'controversy' and they use it in a large part to sell ad spots.) Indymedia doesn't need to do this. Their primary concern is not money-making or winning false legitimacy.
Linda McQuaig is also carried in the National Post for another reason; so that people can ask exactly the question you asked; so that they can feel as though there is a legitimate reason to scorn and ignore alternative news sources.
But I think that this is unwise. Linda McQuaig will not, for instance, be allowed to report on the true events happening in Israel. Canwest Global, (which owns the National Post), has been caught re-wording stories about the war on Palestine so that unaware readers will want to favor the Israelis [www.cbc.ca].
Indymedia and other alternative news sources are needed exactly because they do not fall beneath the control of such influences. Or, at least, that was true until the FBI entered the scene.
-FL
Parent
Re:Why is this "my rights online" (Score:5, Insightful)
The regular media doesn't get taken down so easily...Sounds suspicous....Politically motivated? Possibly...
But kiddy porn ring, no....
Parent
Re:Why is this "my rights online" (Score:5, Informative)
(Source: Wikipedia.org. Released under the GFDL. See article [wikipedia.org])
Parent
Re:And? (Score:5, Informative)
They are not owned by large media companies, and do not give money to politicians (AFAIK - they dont' have much cash). They operate on a shoe-string budget and need more computers.
And less legal problems.
There's a short answer
--LWM
Parent
Re:And? (Score:5, Insightful)
They liked to live on the edge of annoying the establishment... they were the ones that broke the story of the statue of saddam hussen falling being a put-up job for the assembled press (there were only about half a dozen people there, there rest were reporters/press).
"Broke" the story? LOL. More like introduced a conspiracy theory. I watched the whole thing live and there were well more than "half a dozen" Iraqis there. IM's "proof" were pictures *after* the statue fell when most of the were busy dragging saddam's head down the street.
It's not surprising the US want to censor them... surprising they have the guts to do it so publicly though.
It might have something to do with the fact that they have a habit of not pulling illegal material from their site.
Parent
Re:Freedom of speech is a noble thing (Score:5, Interesting)
If (a), what on earth does this have to do with terrorism or indeed the FBI. If (b), this is public info, they just collated it. Again, what does this have to do with the FBI, or indeed terrorists.
Parent
Re:Freedom of speech is a noble thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What is there to know? (Score:5, Insightful)
The first amendment guarantees the right to hold stupid, idiotic political opinions. If you don't like it, there are other countries with different constitutions, feel free to emigrate. Personally, I like the Bill of Rights just fine, thank you.
Parent
Re:all depends on your perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
That is complete, utter, biased, trolling, ideologist bullshit, and so is your +5, Insightful.
Instead of generalizing, why don't you get to know some real, non-radical right-leaning people? (Of course, I can judge the left based on the radicals but that wouldn't be fair either, no?) You'll find they are people, just like you. Most of the time, they even have the same concerns. They just differ on priority levels and solutions.
Oh, how convenient it is for you to dismiss "the right" as, apparently literally, animals. You are much, much more part of the problem than the solution.
Parent
Re:No jurisdiction (Score:5, Insightful)
Airstrip One is Part of Oceania, comrade.
Parent
Re:About time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:About time! (Score:5, Funny)
Face it, life for us will be much better when we all have mandatory implants and the government can track us wherever we go, and can make sure none of us are doing anything that's not approved. Anyone who doesn't go along with this will be sent to a re-education camp, where they'll be turned into happy, productive workers who spend their free time watching Survivor XXIII and attending the official government Church.
Keep America Safe, no matter the cost. Bush Cheney 2004.
Parent
Re:Kinda short on information (Score:5, Funny)
If the British people don't like this, they should be doing something about it such as voting appropriately.
Parent