It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anarchist Websites And Forums Under Attack

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Without a doubt, after the recent school shooting by Weise, FBI and other officials are turning a vigilant eye towards alternative websites and interactive blogs as a crime prevention measure.





The FBI has recently sent two subpoenas to the website administrator of the flag.blackened.net webserver. Recently there have been rumours circulating in anarchist circles the flag's webmaster had been contacted by the FBI, he has released this press release to notify the wider activist community on what has been going on. The Flag server hosts many of anarchism's most widely viewed websites and the removal of this sever would be a major blow to anarchist organising worldwide.

He has been ordered on two separate occasions to submit IP information of people using certain subdomains hosted on the flag server one of which was the popular Infoshop News. These relate to people claiming responsibility for "propaganda by the deed". The moderator believes at least one of these cases are by people trying to make the flag server "vulnerable to government intrusion".

The FBI in recent years, has gone after a number of radical/revolutionary left wing websites, most notably are the shutting down of the raise the fist website and subsequent jailing of it's webmaster Sherman Austin and also targeting many websites on the Indymedia network.
www.indymedia.org...


Let's hope ATS can dodge this invasion on our constitutional right.




posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Hmmm... I wonder if this falls under the same area as the ISP's that refused to release info on users to the RIAA? Or is it special because they are "domestic terrorist organizations"... It's a shame most people won't fight unless it is them being persecuted. They should really take the words of the german christians to heart.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   
eek...Im registered at InfoShop (a famous online anarchist community).

This is more bs from the US government. Not the least bit suprised though.


-J



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   
I feel that the FBI have legit reason to get in the internet and search for Anarchist sites and possible suspects.

The problem is that this "legit reason" can open doors to abuse and target any site that have people that disagree with certain aspects of our government.

I guess if the FBI or any government agency decided to take over the internet or any particular site and shut it down is nobody to stop them from doing it. Right?



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   
marg, the FBI doesnt have ANY "legit reason" to force a webmaster, or server administrator, to hand them the servers of the website. The problem goes far beyond isolated cases of abuse of power, even if that's still an important issue... it's simply violating one of our fundamental rights, which is PRIVACY. Every organisation has the potential to develop criminal or violent activities among its ranks, but that's not a legitimate reason to force this organisation to hand all private information on their activites, and even to take them down or to paralyse them. Criminal cases are supposed to be handled individually, since it's individuals who are perpetrating crimes and not the organisations in which they are working... that, at least, acording to the "liberal" perspective -recognized by the Bill of Rights- of how the justice system must handle acts of mutiny or violence.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 10:20 PM
link   
echtelian is correct.
our rights are our rights
privacy is protected....let the feds use other ways to catch the bad guys.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 10:40 PM
link   
yet more infringement on peoples rights "in order to protect". this is where we are headed folks. i am seeing the states become more of a dictatership than a democracy. hittler made the same plays to cement his power. reichstag fire=9-11? interesting thought as both were "terrorist" type attacks. the burning of the reichstag was perpitrated by the nazi party made to look like someone else. 9-11 serious questions being asked as to us involvement, and coverups. after the reichstag fire hittler declared marshal law. after 9-11 patriet act and the erosions of freedoms and rights. is the same thing happening if being done in a slower less obvious maner?



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 03:24 AM
link   
Only problem is you people say it's our right to have privacy. Only problem with that is the supreme court found that in the constitution, it does not say it anywhere. And if you're at all intrested, it found it in cases of one of the new england states(I forget which) out lawed contraceptives and the supreme court ruled that people had the right to privacy in this case. Same goes with abortion. The right to privacy hasn't been found ever, at least by the supreme court(and I'm pretty sure the federal appeals courts havn't either), for information on the internet. So you may think it's youre right to privacy but there are no laws and no opinions of youre court to support this. Git ur # straight



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echtelion
marg, the FBI doesnt have ANY "legit reason" to force a webmaster, or server administrator, to hand them the servers of the website.


if active discussion regarding past or future crime occurs in a public place then a law enforcement agency has not just the right or reason, but the obligation to check up on it.


Originally posted by Echtelion
The problem goes far beyond isolated cases of abuse of power, even if that's still an important issue... it's simply violating one of our fundamental rights, which is PRIVACY.

Every organisation has the potential to develop criminal or violent activities among its ranks, but that's not a legitimate reason to force this organisation to hand all private information on their activites, and even to take them down or to paralyse them. Criminal cases are supposed to be handled individually, since it's individuals who are perpetrating crimes and not the organisations in which they are working... that, at least, acording to the "liberal" perspective -recognized by the Bill of Rights- of how the justice system must handle acts of mutiny or violence.


one acronym for you: RICO



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simulacra
Without a doubt, after the recent school shooting by Weise, FBI and other officials are turning a vigilant eye towards alternative websites and interactive blogs as a crime prevention measure.


I've been worried that they would use that as a means to go at certain groups.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   
They've been scoping for a long time.

When I first joined this site it was with the knowledge that agencies would have an eye on it and the people within it... as in people hitting too many notes creating the wrong viibe etc.

Post up a thread stating that you've found a UFO/Government document of some sort or something just as CIA/MI5 related, say that you're recruiting people to discypher a code in it hype it up in other threads and make it sound really big, arrange a meeting at an address...

Wouldn't be surprised if a few people are seen snooping around in a few days time looking for info.




[edit on 6-4-2005 by An Entity]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 05:36 PM
link   
A Matter Of Opinion


Originally posted by djpaec
Only problem is you people say it's our right to have privacy. Only problem with that is the supreme court found that in the constitution, it does not say it anywhere.

From Amendments to the Constitution:

Article IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Opinions differ regarding a doctrinal or legal "right to privacy" in the United States, but there have been no shortage of cases, rulings and citation of precedent on this issue.

Body Of Law

The Fourth Amendment prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures" of "persons, houses, papers, and effects" and has been upheld and applied in a wide variety of cases since the founding of the nation.

Additionally, there is a substantial body of federal and state law asserting "privacy rights", as well as longstanding civil precedents which have been invoked to the point of becoming almost as ironclad as statutes.

The True Origin Of Rights

Of course, the only rights anyone truly has are those rights they can defend, so those who either do not consider themselves to have such a right, nor take steps to protect it, have effectively denied it to themselves.

My recommendation is to assert and defend your right to privacy tenaciously, rather than complain that it does not exist.



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   
True, Majic... true.

And it seems like many people here seem to think that the constituion is like somekind of system that keeps judges, politicians and FBI agents from behaving into such specific manners, like a machine that programs them... THEY WON'T FOLLOW THE US CONSTITUTION AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT FORCED BY OTHERS TO FOLLOW IT!

The constitution is just a piece of paper, fundamentally, and it's up to privacy rights watchdogs, activists, lawyers and the people as a whole, to watch over the legitimity of the actions of their administration... the constitution won't do it for them!



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimulacraLet's hope ATS can dodge this invasion on our constitutional right.

ATS tho is not an activist site, wheras anarchists call for the destruction of the state and law and promote, well, anarchy. By nature the government should be making sure that they are, say, exercising free-speech rather than the right to bear arms.



posted on Apr, 7 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
thank you Majic for that post....we need to cling to those rights that we are losing on a daily basis.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
About 6 or 8 months ago I was looking for info on Jack Morton (transistors, chips, UFO connections, gov assasination, et al) and alot of pages and links (not from here, just various) were gone! And weird 'errors' too-not the usual 404's, missing page, etc, they were truly odd errors.

I thought it was strange. As a matter of fact I think I read one page who's admin claimed to have been threatened by some gov sorts (don't remember particulars). When I went to look at the site later, most of it was gone, and again-the weird errors.

I do believe the gov is already strong-arming admins and deleting stuff from the net that it considers a threat.



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I feel that the FBI have legit reason to get in the internet and search for Anarchist sites and possible suspects.

No way!! First of all I run a web hosting company and as long as it is legal and does not bog down my server it's fine with me. It's backed up by the good ole constitution, and I am not giving any info on my customers. 99% of people that post on sites like this, have an opinion that the "mainstream" thinks is looney, we need an outlet for intelligent conversations about real issues that others just can't grasp.

Secondly, I have a forum with a wide variety of topics, some close to these here on ATS, which I firmly believe is backed up by freedom of speech as well.

If I had an incident like a murderer on the site or server I would cooperate, but just to investigate people because their views are different, no way.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 10:05 PM
link   
And I'm not even an anarchist! I'm just all for a strictly by-the-book, or rather, by-the-CONSTITUTION, government!

I'm just anti-fascism, and pro-constitutional republic.


But I think it's a bit ridiculous, going after people who may prefer anarchy. Let them state their views. I'm personally opposed to anarchy, but I'm not opposed to anarchists exercising their First Amendment rights.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Just like everything else, the fascist stupidity that we call the US government will eventually drive all web services out of the reach of tyrany. Most porn and gambling sites have already relocated outside US jurisdiction. Anarchy sites will be next, followed by philosophy sites, and then conspiracy sites such as this one, and anything else that could even remotely be considered anti-state in any sense.

The www itself is a world wide experiment in anarchy. It's unbelievable success threatens the power of all tyrants, to include the US federal government, by demonstrating that the stories they tell about their own importance are greatly exagerated. The web is not perfect, but it runs itself much better than any central authority could.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   
They'd probably go after my blog, too, since I criticize Bush a LOT on it!


Hey--it's not treasonous! That's something Bush is guilty of!




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join