HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I'm generally okay with t...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:43 PM

I'm generally okay with the efforts of 'Anonymous' but this is anti-Democratic

. . . anti-intellectual, and just plain idiotic.


____ In an email blast sent to their community, as well as a message posted on their website, the group announced plans to disrupt President Obama’s State of the Union address and prevent it from live-streaming on the Internet. “Tonight we will face down the largest superpower on Earth. And we will win!” the message reads. “There will be no State of the Union Address on the web tonight.” The group cites a variety of motivations, including “freedom” and “Arran Swartz,” claiming that Obama’s failure to stop the “idiotic and destructive efforts to control the last free space on Earth,” is unconstitutional.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2013/02/12/anonymous-plans-to-hack-obama-s-sotu.html


76 replies, 3984 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 76 replies Author Time Post
Reply I'm generally okay with the efforts of 'Anonymous' but this is anti-Democratic (Original post)
bigtree Feb 2013 OP
arcane1 Feb 2013 #1
kentauros Feb 2013 #35
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #55
kentauros Feb 2013 #59
arthritisR_US Feb 2013 #2
HappyMe Feb 2013 #6
arthritisR_US Feb 2013 #9
HappyMe Feb 2013 #12
arely staircase Feb 2013 #76
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #3
bigtree Feb 2013 #15
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #22
RainbowSuperfund Feb 2013 #24
bigtree Feb 2013 #25
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #32
bigtree Feb 2013 #37
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #47
bigtree Feb 2013 #52
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #56
RudynJack Feb 2013 #38
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #46
RudynJack Feb 2013 #48
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #50
RudynJack Feb 2013 #61
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #62
randome Feb 2013 #63
RudynJack Feb 2013 #66
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #51
onenote Feb 2013 #45
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #49
onenote Feb 2013 #73
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #74
Drale Feb 2013 #4
freshwest Feb 2013 #23
SlimJimmy Feb 2013 #27
libtodeath Feb 2013 #5
Xithras Feb 2013 #7
arcane1 Feb 2013 #10
Xithras Feb 2013 #14
HappyMe Feb 2013 #17
Buzz Clik Feb 2013 #8
Puzzledtraveller Feb 2013 #11
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #13
bigtree Feb 2013 #18
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #20
Puzzledtraveller Feb 2013 #26
AAO Feb 2013 #70
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #16
bigtree Feb 2013 #21
ProSense Feb 2013 #54
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #71
Freddie Stubbs Feb 2013 #19
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2013 #28
bigtree Feb 2013 #31
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2013 #40
Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #29
bigtree Feb 2013 #33
Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #34
bigtree Feb 2013 #41
Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #43
bigtree Feb 2013 #44
geek tragedy Feb 2013 #57
MADem Feb 2013 #30
dreampunk Feb 2013 #69
msongs Feb 2013 #36
bigtree Feb 2013 #42
geek tragedy Feb 2013 #58
Drunken Irishman Feb 2013 #68
SecularMotion Feb 2013 #39
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #53
kentauros Feb 2013 #64
kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #60
gateley Feb 2013 #65
JDPriestly Feb 2013 #67
MADem Feb 2013 #72
arely staircase Feb 2013 #75

Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:49 PM

1. Controlling the internet to protest controlling the internet

yea, that makes sense

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:51 PM

35. They are far from "controlling" the Internet.

I'll be truly impressed with their expertise in hacking when they tap into one of those offshore banks and drain all of the accounts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #35)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:48 PM

55. That is beyond their capabilities. They have a big bag of parlor tricks...

 

And some strength in numbers... but they're largely a joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EastKYLiberal (Reply #55)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:02 PM

59. That's been my impression of them pretty much from the start.

Sure, they can do things I can't do, nor would attempt to do, but changing a website isn't much in the way of hacking.

There was cartoon posted once around here showing a stick figure watching the news. When it was mentioned that the hacking was the result of Anonymous, the response was "Amateurs!" The stick figure was supposed to represent how IT people see Anon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:49 PM

2. I'm with you on this...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:52 PM

6. I'll join you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HappyMe (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:56 PM

9. I love your hair on fire guy..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:58 PM

12. The minute I

saw it, I had to snag it for my siggy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HappyMe (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:29 PM

76. yes, hair on fire guy is cool, i just saved it for special occassions

hope you don't mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:50 PM

3. Much of it is regarding CISPA, which was resurrected and voted upon without warning just days ago.

 

The very limited article to which you link does not mention the dangers of this bill, of the twice-signed NDAA (indefinite detention of US citizens without trial or representation, google "NDAA section 1021" or "NDAA indefinite detention"), or PFC Manning having been held in torture conditions for 1,000 days for whistle-blowing on war crimes, or that the US is killing people in five or more countries via weaponized drones, countries with whom we are not at war, with 178 or more children dead from strikes in Yemen and Pakistan alone, much less the adult civilian casualities.

Things are horribly wrong in this country and none of it appeared on any election ballot so that the people could decide. Activists filled the streets demanding change and were beaten and arrested (7400+ Occupy members) and there has been zero change regarding the issue Occupy brings to light. Zero banksters arrested for nearly bringing this country into the second great depression. Why?

"Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word 'tension.' I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth....

The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a 'more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

~Martin Luther King, Jr.

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/mlk-and-the-peace-process.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:00 PM

15. I agree there's a larger and important issue they say they're advocating here

. . . thank you for posting some of the details.

I'm not convinced that this is the best way to highlight their concerns. You can see the hypocrisy right on the face of this threatened action. Restricting freedom to protest the restriction of freedom. I'm instantly uninterested in anything 'Anonymous' has to say on all of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #15)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:14 PM

22. Martin Luther King, Jr. has words on this subject.

 

MLK and the peace process (benefits of non-violent direct action)

Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth....

The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/mlk-and-the-peace-process.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #22)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:23 PM

24. +++++ :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #22)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:25 PM

25. never knew MLK to advocate anything like this

. . . it's a shame to use him as an example. It's just sophistry to suggest he'd support the blocking of this President's address.


“ . . . somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #25)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:46 PM

32. So you're okay with CISPA, the NDAA, the TPP...and citizens shouldn't protest what is abhorrent? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:56 PM

37. how foolish of you

I've said that 'Anonymous' forfeits their expectation that I'm going to give heed to their arguments on these issues.

I've also said above that I'm in agreement that these are real and important concerns.

It's foolish of you to try and bait me into an argument or debate on the underlying issues on this thread. Neither you, nor 'Anonymous' will compel me into a discussion of this today. That's the consequence (as far as I'm concerned) of this behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #37)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:36 PM

47. I'm attempting to address what you've listed as being concerns, I'm not attempting to argue

 

unless you've mistaken my tone for something it is not. However, twice calling someone foolish is not conducive to furthering a dialogue in which such misunderstandings may be both addressed and understood by both sides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #47)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:43 PM

52. well, I think your post was as baiting as the hacker's intent

I think it's foolish to try and leverage this argument about CISPA, the NDAA, and the TPP on top of this foolish threat of theirs; either by 'Anonymous' or by you on this thread. It's a foolish expectation that I'm going to engage in that today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #52)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:51 PM

56. I've been involved in an unpleasant post war in another thread against my better judgement,

 

apologies if I've allowed any sharp rhetoric or intent into this as a result.

I've posted a link regarding the protests done against CISPA, which initially halted it. This is about losing real freedoms; not only CISPA, but the monstrous NDAA, FISA, the warrantless wiretapping bill which was just signed into five more years of activity....when does it stop? It must be made to stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:00 PM

38. Protest all you want.

Write your congressman, hold a sign, organize a protest rally.

But denying much of the world the opportunity to watch the SOTU speech goes beyond that. As noted above, controlling the internet to protest controlling the internet is stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RudynJack (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:34 PM

46. CISPA and its ilk do not appear on any ballot. The people do not get to vote on such things.

 

Which makes direct action protest imperative if we wish any change whatsoever. Didn't the white house utterly ignore a white house petition regarding marijuana? Can't have them picking and choosing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #46)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:38 PM

48. So your answer

is to fuck over millions of people who may want to watch the SOTU?

Sorry, I'll never agree with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RudynJack (Reply #48)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:40 PM

50. Have you read my link to the ACLU description of this monstrous legislation?

 

It is of grave importance and it is being shoved down our throats in spite of massive protest.

We are literally losing freedoms here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #50)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:17 PM

61. We're not discussing the legislation.

We're discussing whether Anonymous' response is appropriate. I maintain it is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RudynJack (Reply #61)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:21 PM

62. The people have fought this through the system, and momentarily won. Now they're sneaking it back

 

into existence. It is a monstrosity stealing real freedoms. Washington appears to not care what the people want, even after the protests. What to do? Engaging in peaceful civil disobedience in order to draw much-needed attention to this secretive matter effecting all Americans is important, but I accept your stance on whether they should do so or not. I see it as being that important, combined with FISA, NDAA, HR347, what they're doing to PFC Manning, etc.

At what point is this country =ours=, and not =theirs=.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:23 PM

63. At what point is the SOTU address ours and not theirs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #62)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:34 PM

66. Then you should totally start a thread on it!

This thread is about Anonymous' tactics and threats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RudynJack (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:42 PM

51. Despite Protests, Congress To Bring Back CISPA Exactly As It Was Last Year, While Obama Signs Exec O

 

Despite Protests, Congress To Bring Back CISPA Exactly As It Was Last Year, While Obama Signs Exec Order

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130212/02540821948/despite-protests-congress-to-bring-back-cispa-exactly-as-it-was-last-year-while-obama-signs-exec-order.shtml

Protests didn't work. They are going to take away real freedoms with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:27 PM

45. Who voted on it a couple of days ago? And what did they vote on?

Could you provide a link?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #45)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:39 PM

49. You have a google button on your computer as well as I, but I'll indulge you:

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #49)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:16 PM

73. Thanks for confirming that it hasn't been voted on. Its only being reintroduced tomorrow.

Before posting I did check google, and since what I found on google (and the link you just posted) didn't show that the bill had been voted upon recently , I was wondering whether you had some information that I was missing. Turns out you didn't.

Your post says it was "resurrected and voted on without warning a few days ago". In fact, it hasn't been voted on. It hasn't even been reintroduced yet. Reintroduction -- with advance notice --- is happening tomorrow along with a hearing. No vote at the Committee level has been scheduled yet.

I'm not a fan of the bill. But intentionally or unintentionally scaring people by suggesting, incorrectly, that the bill has already been "voted on without warning" doesn't serve any purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #73)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:22 PM

74. I stand corrected. I was mistaking last year's vote for one very recent. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:50 PM

4. At the beginning I supported them

But they are turning more and more extreme and they complain about everything but offer no solutions which is why i dont follow them on twitter anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:19 PM

23. Same here. We have 3 RW cranksters working on disrupting the SOTU. Nugent, Rand, etc.

They also spout off about freedom and liberty and offer no solutions but the status quo which is killing us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:29 PM

27. +1 I agree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:51 PM

5. Stuff like this is just not helpful to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:54 PM

7. It's a risky move for them.

Pull it off, and it's a great, high profile way to embarrass the government and bring attention to some really disgusting practices. Fail, and they only embarrass themselves.

Given the fact that they dumbly pre-announced this and that the government now has plenty of time to prep their systems for a DDoS, my money is on the latter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #7)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:57 PM

10. Only if they replace the live feed with some message that brings attention to issues

Otherwise, people will just think they are having technical difficulty viewing the stream.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:00 PM

14. Not necessarily

If Anonymous pulls it off, it'll be headline news tomorrow. The first question people will ask is "why"? Simply having people ask that question aids their fight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:09 PM

17. If I saw something other than

the SOTU, I certainly wouldn't listen to somebody else's spiel. I would be looking for another way to hear the SOTU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:55 PM

8. This was predictable.

They have been operating outside the law but targeting unpopular people. Their outrage at being prosecuted for their crimes (and the incredible support from various groups) suggested that they would be throwing a broader hacker's net.

And here we are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:58 PM

11. I have to say I like it

but not necessarily agree with it either. I suppose it's the Thoreau in me.

I dunno..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:58 PM

13. "Democracy" translates to "the will and voice of the People". It's not Democracy if "they"

 

don't listen to the people. NDAA, CISPA, TPP, none of it is wanted and the People were not allowed to choose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #13)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:09 PM

18. I'm trying to imagine how a group unaccountable to most Americans

. . . produces acceptable solutions to their concerns with a democratic result. I'm just fine with promoting their concerns (the ones I agree with); but I think they lose credibility for those when they simultaneously work to restrict the views of others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:12 PM

20. The powers that be aren't listening (or, they are, if you know about HR347).

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #13)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:27 PM

26. I'm with you on that Fire

So much of the populace is completely unaware of what laws are passed that effect them. I do say that ultimately their lack of knowledge and engagement is their fault but one must also see that the system desires that. It wants the masses to be sedated and satiated. Atleast Anonymous and others like them can bring some attention to these atrocities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #13)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:48 PM

70. Then we don't live in a democracy. They rarely listen to "We, the people".

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:04 PM

16. Here is an ACLU report on CISPA, which everyone should be upset about. Please read if you don't know

 

Jacob Appelbaum ‏@ioerror

#CISPA is back - we need to ring phones off the hook to stop it (again):
http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty-national-security/cispa-claws-back-life … #PrivacyMatters
Retweeted by fr0g5

The House cybersecurity bill that allows the National Security Agency (NSA) and the military to collect your private internet records is scheduled for an encore appearance on Wednesday. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Ranking Member Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) will reintroduce the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), which news reports say will be the same bill that passed the House of Representatives last year.

That's right, the same bill that allows companies to turn over your sensitive internet records directly to the NSA and the Department of Defense without requiring them to make even a reasonable effort to protect your privacy. The same bill that lets the government use the information it collects for cybersecurity purposes "to protect the national security of the United States"—a concept that is, of course, undefined and incredibly expansive. Here we are, ten months later, with a much-deserved veto threat from the administration, a smarter Senate alternative, and an Executive Order that will address part of the information-sharing issue—yet the House starts with the same old privacy-busting bill as before.

Because of your activism last year, big and important changes were made to the Senate cyber bill, including significant privacy protections. Let's do it again House-side. If the House wants smart cyber legislation that also protects privacy, it needs to ensure that the programs are civilian-led, minimize the sharing of sensitive personal information between government and corporations, and protect collected information from non-cyber uses.

So bone up on what CISPA does, see the many organizations from left to right who have opposed CISPA, compare it to the far better legislation in the Senate, and read why even the Obama administration threatened to veto this bill last year. And get ready to fight for your right to online privacy once again.

---
The article to which you've linked does not mention any of this. It simply demonizes Anonymous. Is it idiotic and anti-intellectual to protest and fight this thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:13 PM

21. I think this group forfeits the expectation that someone should heed their concerns and dialog

. . . as they work to restrict the public's access to the President's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:47 PM

54. The ACLU is

objecting to a bill in the House. What does that have to do with the SOTU?

That's right, the same bill that allows companies to turn over your sensitive internet records directly to the NSA and the Department of Defense without requiring them to make even a reasonable effort to protect your privacy. The same bill that lets the government use the information it collects for cybersecurity purposes "to protect the national security of the United States"—a concept that is, of course, undefined and incredibly expansive. Here we are, ten months later, with a much-deserved veto threat from the administration, a smarter Senate alternative, and an Executive Order that will address part of the information-sharing issue—yet the House starts with the same old privacy-busting bill as before.

Because of your activism last year, big and important changes were made to the Senate cyber bill, including significant privacy protections. Let's do it again House-side. If the House wants smart cyber legislation that also protects privacy, it needs to ensure that the programs are civilian-led, minimize the sharing of sensitive personal information between government and corporations, and protect collected information from non-cyber uses.

So bone up on what CISPA does, see the many organizations from left to right who have opposed CISPA, compare it to the far better legislation in the Senate, and read why even the Obama administration threatened to veto this bill last year. And get ready to fight for your right to online privacy once again.

The ACLU supports the Senate bill and the President's position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #54)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 04:24 PM

71. I believe some Anonymous channels have posted that CISPA's re-emergence is enough in itself.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:10 PM

19. Too bad no one owns televisions anymore

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:35 PM

28. "anti-democratic" with a small "D"?

The State of the Union address is not really about democracy, anyway? It's the equivalent of the British monarch's Speech from the Throne before the Houses of Parliament (which is the reason that Thomas Jefferson dispensed with it and no president addressed congress in such a manner for over a century).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #28)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:43 PM

31. I prefer this assembly to the alternative

. . . and our government isn't an extension of some monarchy. Legislators advantage their own politics off of this assembly. It's more of a definition of intent than it is some imposition. Nothing about this address functionally restricts the ability of Congress to act in any way they so choose.

Funny, really, that anyone would think that the hundreds of legislators in our democratic system of government would be at some significant disadvantage over this one man speaking before them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:03 PM

40. The alternative is a parliamentary system

which is inherently more democratic. There is a good reason why no other country has adopted the American system of government. In a parliamentary system, the party or coalition of government is that which has the most seats in the lower house of the legislature (the House of Commons or equivalent). The American system is inherently undemocratic in much of its execution, in contrast; a president may be elected with a minority of the popular vote, and thanks to the excessive power of the Senate, a party which represents states accounting for a minority of the population may hamstring legislative action; also, an American president is more or less an elected constitutional monarch (only with much more actual power than most constitutional monarchs).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:37 PM

29. Tsk. Tsk. How dare people express their dismay at having their freedoms curbed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #29)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:47 PM

33. it would be like you obliviating my posts

. . . just to post this one of your own.

This is more than 'expressing dismay.' It's tit-for-tat. Moreover, it's hypocritical.

Anything goes to 'protect their freedoms,' huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #33)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:48 PM

34. See 1st Amerndment for reference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #34)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:05 PM

41. one can forget that within those rights

. . . is the expectation that folks can/will disagree. That's everyone; not just one group or one single concern.

It's still escaping me how the suppression of speech advantages the freedom of speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #41)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:10 PM

43. Are you talking about the suppression of speech by the NDAA or by the protesters?

Which has more power to actually suppress speech "Anonymous" or the government. Obama's speech will not be suppressed. He will give it. It will be recorded and distributed to the media even if Anonymous is successful in disrupting the transmission of it live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #43)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:25 PM

44. degrees

. . . now you're measuring 'freedoms' for everyone.

That's perfectly fine and acceptable for you to do; as long as you don't seek to advantage your pov by restricting dissemination of my own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #29)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:52 PM

57. Nice straw argument. How about something more honest? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:39 PM

30. Smells like another "roll up" to me.

Seems like every time they go and threaten to do something "over the top," the next thing we know, there are tons of arrests of a whole shitload of people. Then, we hear nothing for awhile; there are a few BIG convictions/jailings, and next thing ya know, a bunch of hackers are flipped and working for three letter agencies.

Interrupting the internet so people can't see the SOTU is stupid--they're only screwing those without access to network television. And that's IF they're able to do it.

But the hacksheep will no doubt ATTEMPT to do their bit, no doubt--and be targeted/identified for their trouble! And maybe that's what this is all about...?

It's just silly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #30)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:46 PM

69. ROGER THAT MADem!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:54 PM

36. odd how DU loves anonymous until it interrupts the great dems PR machine lol nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #36)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:10 PM

42. funny

. . . given that the action you seem to be defending here is, itself, propaganda; especially when coupled with the fascist-like suppression of speech that's been threatened.

Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed towards influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position by presenting only one side of an argument. -wiki

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #36)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:52 PM

58. Or, how DU loves them unless they act like assholes.

Which they do sometimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #36)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:41 PM

68. Do you really laugh out loud at your own comments?

That must be weird for people who are around you when you're posting on DU - you know, the constant, odd laughing for no apparent reason.

I wish I could LOL at your comments ... but they're never ever really funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:02 PM

39. 'Anonymous' is not a group with motivations

'Anonymous' is a tag that can be used by any group for good or for bad purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:45 PM

53. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has done more for Internet freedom in a legal way. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EastKYLiberal (Reply #53)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:29 PM

64. There ya go!

I've always liked the EFF

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:14 PM

60. Anonymous has overstepped its bounds with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:33 PM

65. Agree with you. I'm usually a supporter of theirs, but this is stupid and childish.

I hope they fail miserably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:35 PM

67. Anonymous is a lawless reaction to authoritarianism.

Anyone believing in anything can call themselves "Anonymous" and wreak havoc on the internet.

Anonymous by its nature doesn't answer to anyone.

Anonymous is essentially and authoritarian group that responds to an authoritarian alter-ego with authoritarian actions.

Anonymous cannot lead us out of the wilderness or part the Red Sea.

Anonymous cannot lead or direct us or even give us hints on how to improve our democracy. They can only show what is wrong in our society now, but they don't present alternatives.

Anonymous could be as great a danger as what we have.

Julian Assange was far more responsible in the way he handled leaked material that was provided to him. I differentiate between Wikileaks and Anonymous. Wikileaks accepted news stories from whistleblower sources. Anonymous simply steals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #67)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 04:29 PM

72. I am of the mind that it is a highly "lawful" recruiting agency run by

a three letter agency or three! Even if it's not that, it steps on its noodle often enough that this is the end result!

The tactics are a bit ... coercive, but they do manage to recruit some talent. If you have a choice between, say, a couple of decades in jail or a paid job with medical, dental and retirement benefits working for a governmental organization, which would you choose?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:26 PM

75. so i'm not gonna get to see it? thanks, anonymous assholes!

if i miss this because somebody wants to strike a blow for freedom from their mom's basement i will be pissed. i hope they get arrested and their parents have to hire expensive lawyers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread