Twitter Fights US Court For WikiLeaks Details 268
An anonymous reader writes "Micro-blogging site Twitter is opposing an order from a US court to reveal the account details of supporters of WikiLeaks. Twitter has called on Facebook and Google to reveal whether they also received similar court orders. As part of the US government's investigation into WikiLeaks, a court ordered Twitter, in mid-December, to give details of accounts owned by supporters of the whistle-blower site. Twitter has protested against the subpoena and informed the individuals whose account information has been requested, while raising the possibility that other social networking players have received similar orders."
Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Another salvo in the war (Score:5, Insightful)
The only country at war over the cables will be the USA — and it will not over the leaked cables, but over how they have dealt with the whole matter. The US government are starting to embarrass themselves in front of an international crowd.
"Opposing"? Where does it say that? (Score:5, Insightful)
I see nothing in there to indicate that Twitter is forming any kind of legal opposition to the order. I, for one, would be happy to see that they had. Government overreach should be resisted every time.
Yes, I believe this is "overreach", considering that nobody in the list except Bradley Manning has been accused of any crimes, and Manning himself hasn't even been charged.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
That makes absolutely no fucking sense [thefirstpost.co.uk], whatsoever.
Reread what AC said, I think you hit it too quickly.
Well, if you're a teabagging Palinista, unless you're pounding down Assange's door with a torch and pitchfork ready to behead him, you're a "supporter".
AC was saying that "if you are Palin", inherently saying that if you are of the "palinite" mindset, an individual would be by default a WL supporter if said individuals are not donning torch and pitchfork (which is actually in alignment with your link you posted as a counter point), per the "palinite" mindset of "If you are not 100% choking the red-white-and-blue dick, then you are a terrorist."
Re:Ok, some clarification. (Score:4, Insightful)
I know we are all quick to jump to the conclusion that 'oh noez teh gubment wants internet ppls infos'
Well, they do, but I see what you're trying to say. However, you also just said, emphasis mine,
They aren't immediately just going after random Joe for saying "I like what those guys do".
Aren't immediately going after them? So you do know, then. The effect is to make the public at large believe that their info may be one day be subpoena'd for posting pro-Wikileaks(or any other kind of "subversive" speech) words online. There's nothing the feds can find on Twitter that they don't already know about those key players.
Also, for the first time in my life, I think I'm kinda respecting Twitter.
Re:Ok, some clarification. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, that's great. It's just the 'bad people' that they're after: including an Icelandic MP. Considering this whole 'grand jury' process is going on in secret, why should we be confident that there's a due process behind deciding whose IP addresses are being fished out of Twitter?
I mean, call me an ass when I'm proved wrong, but the whole point of Wikileaks is that you have a drop-box to leak documents, but it's clean hands from the other side. They don't 'conspire,' they just receive the stuff and publish it. It's pretty open what they do and how. They're just desperate to pin a crime to pin a crime on Julian and his buddies, because that Espionage Act law is looking like weak beer.
Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:3, Insightful)
We were never the 'good guys' we were always the slightly better than the rest guys.
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:5, Insightful)
Man what is happening over there in the US? Didn't you guys start off as the good guys? When did it all start to go so horribly wrong?
When we found out someone already lived here.
Time line (Score:1, Insightful)
It when down hill after President Eisenhower left office.
The slide down hill hit the after burners when Ronald Regan got into office.
We went ballistic with W.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
What makes you a "supporter" ?
Only a dirty Commie would ask a question like that. Who are your friends?
- Joe McCarthy
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:5, Insightful)
...and that's when it started to go horribly wrong - when you started to think you were better than others.
No, this IS the war (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it IS the war. It just isn't about militaries fighting it out on a battlefield; it is about governments and free citizens fighting over the rights of man.
Twitter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
How else are you supposed to silence dissenting voices, if you can't identify them?
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
So, they certainly must be going after the NYT and the WSJ, eh?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ok, some clarification. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:3, Insightful)
Man what is happening over there in the US? Didn't you guys start off as the good guys? When did it all start to go so horribly wrong?
No, the US stated off as a bunch of terrorists in the 1770s. It took a long time to earn Good Guy status. The real respect came from WWII and its aftermath.
Sad that the respect is being squandered.
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:1, Insightful)
..it's one step above most of the world.
Yes, it's always nice when you're not the one being trampled.
Re:No, this IS the war (Score:5, Insightful)
And while the "free citizens" are fighting the scarecrow, their corporate masters are tightening their fist one squeeze at the time.
The true enemy sits in the boardroom; the lackey in the White House is simply not important.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a very interesting read of the subpoena. I would even suggest it was a sensationalist interpretation.
And you also believe that those 637,000 people will not be on some sort of gov't interest list? I know that speculation on my part is also "sensationalist", but really, do you think it wont happen? And do you think people should want to NOT be put on that list?
Re:Another salvo in the war (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey cold_fjord,
Are you white? Born and raised in the USA? Is there no chance whatsoever that you're involved with this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/giffords-shooting-political-violence-polarised [guardian.co.uk]
Jared Loughner, the suspect in Saturday's shooting spree in Arizona, was not working alone. True, the rampage apparently emerged from his confused, unstable and troubled mind.
Officials think he was not working alone - who knows, you could be that missing conspirator. Maybe just in case, you should be jailed and tortured until you admit to it. And even though they may find that he *was* working alone, better safe than sorry, right?
I mean, why not? It's not like you're being a citizen should afford you any special rights. It's for the safety of our children, after all.
Re:Didn't the US start off as the good guys? (Score:4, Insightful)
Some reasons why American might feel the US is 'better' than other countries:
- Introduction of Democracy to the modern world.
That was France.
- Abolishment of Slavery, world-wide.
Actually you where the last Western Northern Hemisphere country to do that.
- Defeated the most powerful nation (Britian). Twice.
Ok you did defeat Britain, now if they where actually the world's most powerful nation is a bit open to interpretation.
- Accepted women as equal citizens
You where also basically the last Western Northern Hemisphere country to do that. Europe had Universal Suffrage long before USA.
- Defeated the Nazis and the Japanese
No, here we go again. I know you don't really learn history at school there, but see, the URSS defeated the Nazis. Ok? Repeat after me and tell your friends, the URSS defeated the Nazis. No other nation was actually indispensable to the defeat of the Nazis except for URSS.
- "Invented" electricity (specifically, AC current)
No, the AC current (nobody invented electricity just like nobody invented light) can be attributed to a variety of names: Guillaume Duchenne - French, Lucien Gaulard - French, Nikola Tesla - Serbian, Sebastian Ziani de Ferranti - English/Italian. And in all these names you don't see a single American, now do you?
- Built the Bomb.
Yes you did. Congratulations for building something you used to kill more than half a million civilians. I bet you should be really proud about that one, just like whoever invented slavery for instance should be proud about it.
- Put a man on the moon.
Yup, and that one a great one I have to admit.
- Invented the microprocessor and the Internet
Yes, you also did that.
So basically you have 5 out of 9 of your "American" accomplishments completely wrong, 1/9 (the bomb) is simply no thing any sane person would be proud about, other 1/9 is just not factually correct. So basically you have 2 / 9 right. Congratulations. And congratulations to your fantastic educational system that seem to teach you history very well. No wonder you are so proud of yourselves, you don't know crap about history and are brainwashed since childhood to think you are the best at everything while in the rest of the developed world we tend to learn facts at school.