View Full Version : London IndyMedia Servers Seized by FBI
Techie2000
10-10-2004, 05:39 PM
<a href="http://www.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/112047.shtml">Straight from the horse's mouth</a>.
I would like to think there is a good reason, however this goes to show why redundancy on the internet is a good thing (or bad depending on your views). Because the servers are distributed amongst many different countries, the other nodes that weren't siezed just pick up the slack. Decentralization is a powerful component of stopping any government from taking control of the internet.
Also the conspiracy theorists are already theorizing out of the wazoo...
ethics
10-10-2004, 05:40 PM
Well, I can't say I am surprised. In reading some of their articles, I would say it was borderline threats and planning, definitely endorsing anything anti-American.
The outcry was from the extreme left who sympathized with them and the emanating whine was about the "freedom of speech". Well...
Via Slashdot (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/10/1716256):
According to this Indymedia.org article and AFP report, the request to seize Indymedia servers hosted by a U.S. company in the UK (covered in this previous slashdot story) originated from government agencies in Italy and Switzerland, not the United States.
Because Indymedia's hosting company, Rackspace.com, is a U.S. company, the FBI coordinated the request and accompanied UK Metropolitan Police on the seizure under the auspices of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), an international legal treaty, but, according to an FBI spokesman, 'It is not an FBI operation. Through [MLAT], the subpoena was on behalf of a third country.'" Read on below for more.
I don't know the specifics as to why the seizure was called for in the first place, but again, after reading a lot of crap there, I am not surprised. Free speech does not give anyone rights to threaten people.
ethics
10-10-2004, 05:42 PM
Merge my topic to this one please. Decentralized is a good thing? That's what terrorists think as well.
Techie2000
10-10-2004, 05:46 PM
Merged. And Leon, the terrorists think that because it works. I'm not saying decentralization is always going to favor the good guys, because decentralization is not inheretently good nor evil, but rather it tends to usually work and be good for those decentralizing...
ethics
10-10-2004, 08:08 PM
Ah ok, then we agree.
rhobite
10-10-2004, 11:49 PM
Merge my topic to this one please. Decentralized is a good thing? That's what terrorists think as well.
Therefore Indymedia must be terrorists? Great logic.
ethics
10-10-2004, 11:51 PM
Therefore Indymedia must be terrorists? Great logic.
I am sorry you had to take my post out of context of the thread to make your point, whatever it was.
rhobite
10-11-2004, 01:09 AM
I am sorry you had to take my post out of context of the thread to make your point, whatever it was.
I believe we both understand exactly what the other is saying.
Biker
10-11-2004, 01:10 AM
Care to elaborate? I understood his post perfectly.
Techie2000
10-11-2004, 01:47 AM
Care to elaborate? I understood his post perfectly.I agree with Biker and ethics.
Pyrion
10-11-2004, 06:53 AM
I don't know the specifics as to why the seizure was called for in the first place, but again, after reading a lot of crap there, I am not surprised. Free speech does not give anyone rights to threaten people.
Indymedia's always been one of the Internet's bastions of stupidity. I'm not surprised. It had to have happened sooner or later.
ethics
10-11-2004, 11:00 AM
Indymedia's always been one of the Internet's bastions of stupidity. I'm not surprised. It had to have happened sooner or later.
Well, there are plenty of sites which has stupidity. American youth's stupidity and ignorance is just amazing (and I am sure it's mostly youth in general not just American). They have the right to be stupid and ignorant, that's not illegal or stretches the freedom to say something.
No, why they were raided is because they, as I have a few times, saw pretty :friggin: up stuff there like, the Americans should be the only ones targetted for beheadings, there was another stating how he hated his neighbor who "had his ass up so far up Bush's ass and he should be beheaded..." things along the borderline like that. I also saw a few cross it and I am fairly sure this was the reasons they were raided.
Biker
10-11-2004, 11:02 AM
I'm not so sure it's as simple as that. Considering who the requesting agencies were, there's something else going on. The FBI performed the raid at the request of a foreign law enforcement agency. Something bigger is afoot with this case.
ethics
10-11-2004, 11:05 AM
I'm not so sure it's as simple as that. Considering who the requesting agencies were, there's something else going on. The FBI performed the raid at the request of a foreign law enforcement agency. Something bigger is afoot with this case.
Oh sure, I don't doubt it could be something bigger. Just stating that the hate speech was indicitive of what they were all about. It's like White Power servers being raided and I would not blink an eye. Although WP have learned from their past mistakes and as our local member Siegy, they are more careful in saying something with a lot more care.
Not defending any particular side here, but I'm curious - is stating that someone should be beheaded against any laws?
Because I'm confused - if the reason they were siezed was due to things they stated, but the servers are located in the US, how does another country have the right to request that our FBI sieze a server here? Hate speech is still speech, so isn't it protected?
Biker
10-11-2004, 01:57 PM
Not defending any particular side here, but I'm curious - is stating that someone should be beheaded against any laws?
It is if the comment is made against the President, but then you'd see the Secret Service involved, not just the FBI.
There's more to this case than just the "speech" issue. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
rhobite
10-11-2004, 02:16 PM
Care to elaborate? I understood his post perfectly. That makes two of us. I believe I'm done with this line of questioning.
Not defending any particular side here, but I'm curious - is stating that someone should be beheaded against any laws?Usually not, it has to be a specific threat. Just stating generally that someone should die isn't enough, at least in the US. European laws are probably stricter about this sort of thing, after all several countries ban hate speech there.
I have a feeling that this is an investigation into the offline activities of someone. It wouldn't surprise me if some people who were involved with anti-globalization or environmental direct action groups were also involved with Indymedia. My guess is one of these people is under investigation, and Indymedia may have evidence or admissions of crimes. My gut feeling tells me this isn't just about what someone posted.
ethics
10-11-2004, 03:12 PM
Not defending any particular side here, but I'm curious - is stating that someone should be beheaded against any laws?
No, but if and when I say that Misu's hubby's head should be lobbed off and stuffed in the a garbage can, then yes.
And yes, they got specific and personal.
Stiofán
10-11-2004, 03:20 PM
Let's be very clear up front. As of now, no one knows why they were raided, and anything here is just speculation. They could have been hosting private forums/files on the server which has/had bearings on a UK criminal matter of some sort.
Putting a policitical spin on it this early doesn't mean much I'm afraid.
Techie2000
10-14-2004, 01:08 AM
Looks the servers are <a href="http://argentina.indymedia.org/news/2004/10/228938.php">being returned</a>.
rhobite
10-14-2004, 10:50 AM
Still no word on why the servers were seized, and under what court order.