Printable View
I ve just learnt that indymedia bureaus(they maintain sites in 20 countries),a free independent news server were closed by FBI.The bureaus were located in London but that did not prevent the Feds to close the bureaus. In fact the intervention was requested by Suisse and Italy authorities....next time you watch Fox news just keep that in mind..... :mad:
I ve just learnt it i dont know when it happened so dont quote if you already know it...
Google News Search with Articles. The question remains as to what made the Swiss and Italian governments nervous about Indymedia and what they thought was important enough to get a subponea.
One of the stories suggests this:
How true that is I don't know but it would be hard for RackSpace to deny a legal request and the US is already determined to track down "insurgents" so it's no surprise that they followed through on the subponea.Quote:
According to AFP, the federal prosecutor of Bologna, Marina Plazzi, has stated that she is investigating Indymedia because "it may support terrorism"; while the Swiss investigation dates back to the 2003 G8 summit in Evian, where the organisation posted photographs where Swiss intelligence agents could be identified.
"Mud and poison"
The Milan-based Corriere della Sera suggests that the Italian request comes as a result of the Indymedia Italia site appearing to support insurgents involved in the deaths of Italian carabinieri in Al-Nasiriyah, southern Iraq, leading to National Party demands for the site's closure.
I don't know how much 'terrorists' were these people....I think that we must ensure that even the alternative sources of information get to us...I am a bit in doubt about who is finally a terrorist and who is not...and I thought censorship is a thing of the past...and I have read the reasons officially presented for that action...do you think they are justifying what they did??? :(
HA! Very naive. Censorship is alive and well as long as it benefits someone. There are always variations of censorship (removing racist and child pornographic websites are forms of censorship if you really want get down to it). We justify the censorship according to our own needs and morales (for right or wrong).Quote:
and I thought censorship is a thing of the past
Of course they are. Nothing done today is done without some type of marketing spin that says "look at how good/righteous we are in what we do". There may in fact be a legitimate concern (we don't have enough information and all sides of it to make a valid judgement, IMO) but then again, there may not and this may have just been a reason to shut down a dissenting voice when certain nations need their people to hear what they want them to hear.Quote:
do you think they are justifying what they did???
Let me get this....
TWO Euro countries requested the action... and the FBI ran over to London and raided them?
Or did the FBI close American sites located in America because Italy asked them? And it's our fault? Interesting.
And that has something to do with Fox?
FBI closed the American sites because Italy and Switzerland provided subponeas requesting specific data that was stored on the servers (at least that's the impression I get from the limited info in the various articles).Quote:
Or did the FBI close American sites located in America because Italy asked them?
Got the impression they went to London and closed the sites. Well not really but I was making a point on the desire to automatically claim foul on deeds that are perhaps necessary. Seems when a neutral country like Svitzerlund make statement on events that go against their nature then perhaps we listen.
eye vill stop vatching FUX.
deh are ze leaders is za conspiratzy.
viva lasvegas
Ok I ll say it once more:THE FBI CLOSED THE INDYMEDIA BUREAUS IN LONDON AND THEY CAN DO THAT BECAUSE OF AN AGREEMENT THAT EXISTS BETWEEN THOSE COUNTRIES CONCERNIG WAR AGAINS TERRORISM.The facts are true roadclosed.May be you don't feel very well because it is the fbi.Maybe you don't like the fact that your country leads a war against terrorism and the term terrorism is used for sth really general,sometimes humble,sometimes irrelevant.I did not understand what you said about Switzerland...if you think it is a neutral state then...get informed, we are not in World War II.They participate in military exercises,they participate in this great war against terrorism,they also sometimes do bad things.Don't be so negative.Watch around you. I don't hate you I hate your president's administration (i think Kerry ll do the same).And I also hate the fact that many governments benefit from this administration to limit our rights.Even my country.So don't get upset.I don't believe in any conspiracy.It is just that Fox represents at least for me the 'for-bush' information.It is on the other side.With the good guys.Indymedia was with the bad guys. At least for the Feds.....
Here is a 'bundel-link' to news regarding this:
http://www.odebi.org/ax/ax.php?url=1...d44104fa1a6661
It links to lots of coverage about this in three different languages (Italian, French and English)
Cheers
Hrmm.. my mistake. I was under the impression that they were closing the ones in the US, as I didn't think the US would have juristiction in the UK. But going to the "Indymedia Solidarity Petition" Website I did find the following clarification:
It's probably one of those tricky legal things: servers are owned by a US company and thus are bound by US law. It is a curious legal situation however. Indymedia has provided a fair amount of info that might be of interest to those following this.Quote:
On 7 October, 2004, hard drives from two Indymedia servers were seized from the London office of a US-owned web hosting company, Rackspace, at the request of the US Justice Department, apparently in collaboration with Italian and Swiss authorities.
Some more information if your interested.
Heres the full article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10...oa_connection/Quote:
By John Lettice
Published Thursday 14th October 2004 16:14 GMT
Updated Indymedia and other interested parties are to seek an injunction preventing the export of the contents of the servers that were seized last week. This content is thought to have included correspondence with lawyers involved in the case against Genoa police accused of grievous bodily harm, falsifying evidence, slander and abuse of police powers, during and subsequent to the 2001 G8 summit.
The servers housed data belonging to a number of Indymedia journalists, including Mark Covell, who was beaten close to death by Genoa police, and is now involved in actions against them. One demonstrator was shot dead by police. Covell told The Register that email to his lawyers in Italy is likely to have been on the servers, and that a number of separate challenges to the seizures were pending. The injunction is likely to be sought by human rights solicitor Gareth Peirce within the next 24 hours.
As for the legal aspect. Also part of the article:
Quote:
Although it was at first thought that the seizures had been carried out under a US-UK Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), it now seems possible that the framework used was a European version to which the UK, Italy and Switzerland are signatories. The FBI's involvement therefore remains unclear, although it may have been approached initially because the hosting company, Rackspace, is US. MLATs, whose operation is cloaked by secrecy and gagging orders, are intended to provide a mechanism for signatories' security forces to obtain evidence and to make arrests internationally, and they are disturbingly dependent on the bona fides of the requesting party and the judgment of the requested one.
In this case, the latter is the Home Office, which is coming under pressure to explain itself. Richard Allan, Liberal Democrat MP for Sheffield Hallam, has tabled a written question for David Blunkett for answer tomorrow (Friday). ®
but in the interest of the lives of the agents who could be identified it was probably a smart thing to do -- i am all for free speech, but freedom no matter how free comes with a price and limitations, and if you are not willing to pay a high price then there are more limitations
To be honest I had not read all this information on the newspaper...it is just much more explanatory now...thanks jinxy!
djscribble (I love this dj btw) I did not fully understand you:by any means I cannot accept any limitation of freedom as long as it does not limit smb's else freedom...I am just a bit worried about the whole situation concerning information and freedom of speech...