WikiLeaks' advocates compare 'hacktivism' to 1960's civil protests

[Joanne98]

WASHINGTON: Since releasing a cache of 250,000 classified US diplomatic cables this month, WikiLeaks has been under the scanner of various governments and faced intense criticism around the world.

However, the whistleblower website has also enjoyed the frenzied support of groups who seem intent on speaking out, and in some cases waging war on WikiLeaks' behalf.

The most prominent of these groups is known as Anonymous, which last week sought to disable the websites of several U.S. companies as part of what it called 'Operation Payback'.

A member of Anonymous, who declined to be named because he said he feared arrest, compared the attacks on US companies' web sites - known to some as "hacktivism" - to earlier versions of civil protests.

"It was like the sit-ins during the 1960s when you had college students taking up space in restaurants," the Washington Post quoted the member, as saying.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international-business/WikiLeaks-advocates-compare-hacktivism-to-1960s-civil-protests/articleshow/7088282.cms

[Le Taz Hot]

1. This is the Pentagon Papers

21st Century style. With a WHOLE lot more content.

[NightWatcher]

2. We've seen only 1-2% of what they have so far

I can't wait to see what happens when the good shit hits the fan

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. Agreed. Lotsa folks... DEMs included ... wanted Ellsberg boiled in oil.

If the Obama DOJ is foolish enough to try to bring Assange to trial ( and foolishness is by no means in short supply in this admin.) , we are in for quite a spectacle.

[KharmaTrain]

3. So Cyber Games Replace Marching In The Streets?

This one is a real reach. No way a bunch of kids in mom's basement is the same as the thousands who hit the streets and spent the better part of 7 years not just voicing opposition against the war but involved in many other causes as well (the environmental movement, sexual and racial equality)...I don't see any of that with Wikileaks.

Don't take a lot of skin to play hacker games on a puter compared to getting out and putting your feet and elbow grease where your convictions are.

[Le Taz Hot]

7. Do you recall how long it took for the anti-war

movement to gain mass popularity? I do. I can't speak for the youngins (I'd like to think I'm wrong when I say they get too distracted by the newest I-shiney-thing), but the Boomers haven't gone anywhere and I think there are enough disenfranchised within the populace that it could very well lead to activism which will fuel the movement. But it takes time.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Yes I Do...

It was a steady rise of activisim...between the Gulf of Tonkin and the '68 DNC protests (the first big scale ones) was 4 years and included sit ins and draft card burning. That said, we live in different times and it calls for different types of activism. It's one thing to get out and set up websites and blogs to counter the corporate media propaganda or using technology in addition to real "legwork" but not in place of it.

You are right about the newest bright shiny thing...and our generation had our distractions as well, but those who try to compare history mostly do so to make their point regardless of other factors that were going on. My concern is those who have put so much faith in Wikileaks could be set up for a fall...either if these revelations get little attention...or even worse, if someone with other motives uses Wikileaks as a major disinformation dump. As Bruce Springsteen said "Blind faith and obidience can get you killed".

Cheers...

[lunatica]

8. You don't think they have convictions?

It's modern protest taken to obviously have an impact on modern technology. Why would you think that protesting physically is somehow a superior form of commitment? In the Wikileaks case this protest activity is international in scope.

I don't think getting your head bashed in is a superior way of protesting, or somehow shows you're a better person or more committed. Do you really think protesting against Mastercard with a peaceful Sit-In or a riot at their corporate headquarters would have worked better? I don't.

[KharmaTrain]

12. Superior...No...But Imporant, Yes...

When a Congresscritter looks out his window and sees a million protesters that does send a message...far more than 10 million emails. But both do have an importance.

I was at plenty of rallies and never saw anyone's head get bashed in...but it got a lot of coverage. We also had Progressive Radio that brought people together as well as the underground papers that served as the internet of its time. Again...all working together is what made a difference. None is superior...the matter is what is the most effective way of getting public support in your cause that forces the politicians to react and act. While I hate to admit this, the teabaggers have done a hell of a lot more of the 60s type activism than those on this side of the sandbox and they're getting better results.

Having "convictions" is a strawman...as one can be committed to a cause and not to a specific group or personality. I've applauded Wikileaks (and especially those who have taken risks in providing the data) but it's overall impact to this point has been talking head chatter and little else. I shut down Mastercard by not having one of their cards...works for me. Do I think a series of protests would serve better than a lame DOS attack that didn't last long and had little notice? People seeing signs regularly in front of businesses will pay a lot more attention...why unions picket. It's the bad PR that gets a corporate to act...not playing "War Games" in mom's basement.

[lunatica]

13. A lot of these Anonymous group people aren't Americans

Wikileaks is not an 'American' phenomenon. And evidently the group members of Anonymous aren't from one country only. American credit card companies were flooded in order to stop any business activity but the computer activists who did it are all over the world. And the companies which were picked were picked for refusing transaction activity from supporters to contribute to Assange and Wikileaks. Should the credit card companies be the only ones to decide they can use the internet to suppress activism?

It's just a different tactic which makes sense in these times of technology. And this just started, so no one can know if it's effective or not.

Here are photos of people protesting in public

http://anonops.blogspot.com/

edited to add link

[KharmaTrain]

16. The Problem Is "Annonymous"

We know the names and faces of past protestors...Abby Hoffman to Cindy Sheehan...people who gave a face to the causes and also drew the media attention that in some ways led to their downfalls but also gave their causes a lot of credibility.

I'm no friend of the predatory credit card companies and their shutting down the Wikileak accounts were an unprovoked action but the DDoS attacks are fun sport for those who are playing along but even Wikileak folks are admitting is a PR disaster.

Last thing is the "international" aspect. All well and good that our friends abroad want to show solidarity or have their own motives, but that scores little points with many Americans just as much as when we stick our foot into someone elses' business. Other than about a half day of negative corporate media coverage about the DOS attack, I don't see what other effect it's had or doing this against any other company. It only pisses people off. Let's put the shoe on the other foot and say some foreign group gets pissed at DU and decides to shut the servers down...ya gonna be more sympathetic to their cause?

This "protest" is using pea shooters against nukes...and gives the corporates a big chip in their goal to control the internet.

[lunatica]

18. Your comparison with someone shutting DU down isn't relative to what's going on

For me, the truth always trumps everything. It may be a terrible disappointment to hear it, but it's always good to know. If DU were lying and secretly working against our interests just to further its own nefarious goals then I would welcome the truth about it.

[KharmaTrain]

22. All Perspective

Personally, I'd prefer to see all the depositors in a bank withdrawl their money as far more effective than messing up with people who don't have any clue what's happening other than they can't pay their bills or sitting freezing at a gas station while their card doesn't go through. Again, the Wikileaks people see how counterproductive these cyber games are...and how it's hurting their cause by distracting from the content and focusing on the street theater.

Now whatif someone dumps documents via Wikileaks that says that Bernie Sanders is really a right wing conservative or some other disinformation...a black-ops game that isn't quickly detected and doesn't serve agendas? Then is it justifiable to shut down the site cause it's "secretly working against our interests"? Or do we respect freedom of speech and the free flow of information rather than try to use it as yet another weapon rather than a constructive tool?

Your nefarious is the other guy's hero...

Cheers...

[jaxx]

5. I don't think it's anything like the 60s.

Today it's anonymous hackers. Then it was people on the front line, knowing they would be beaten back and willing to take the punishment in order to advance their civil rights.

It's weird to see people romanticize the leaks and the hacks, to try to give them status as the 60s when they hide behind their keyboards.

[lunatica]

10. See response #8

Getting their heads bashed in in the 60s was the only way to protest. What makes you think Anonymous members aren't committed?

We have plenty of Corporations doing plenty of computer shit to us everyday. They not only get all the information they can about you through computers and without being traced, but they also sell it and share it with each other. Is that OK with you?

Here are photos of people protesting in public

http://anonops.blogspot.com/

edited to add link

[xchrom]

6. spot. on. recommend. nt

[Catherina]

11. Rec'd with support n/t

[annm4peace]

14. I love their power. I wondered what the young people were up too :)

[bemildred]

15. Yeah, this is all very retro.

The government "homeland security" babble, the corresponding loss of legitimacy and credibility, the well-deserved ridicule, the anti-authoritarian protests and civil disobedience, the political buffoonery, the clinging to the Drug War, the massive deficits, the loss of international prestige and influence, the dissembling and deceit, the ludicrous incompetence and ignorance at the top.

[pipi_k]

17. Bullshit

Civil rights activists put themselves in harm's way. They risked life and limb to do what they did.

What are these hackers risking?


Carpal tunnel?

Computer monitor-induced eyestrain?

Hemmorrhoids from sitting too long?


Wow. What heroes.

[madmax]

19. 'by any means necessary'

And I don't mean violence.

Everything has a place, the internet, marches, whatever catalyst moves us forward. Just my 2 cents.

[pipi_k]

23. I think that in this case, with the hackers....

it's by the safest, most convenient means.

Heaven forbid they get anything more than a broken fingernail on their keyboards from their "protests".




Not arguing with you, btw...just adding my own two cents...

:)

[AngryAmish]

30. Federal prison

It is a crime.

[AngryAmish]

31. To all the naysayers...yes, yes we will try to stay off of your lawn

[Odin2005]

34. Demonstrations are useless now, they have ben tamed by the PTB.

And if any protests get "out of hand" the pigs just send in some agent provocateurs to give then an excuse to crush the protest.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. New times. New tactics.

Mass demonstrations, at least in this country, have been successfully foiled as a tactic by the establishment. What worked for us in the mid-20th century no longer works. I see the cyber rebellion as another and, perhaps, better tool to give the bosses headaches and rock their boat.

[madmax]

24. Back in the day there was no such thing

'Free Speech Zones'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

Exactly. Back in the day, sit-ins, demonstrations, were disruptive and worked.

Now, they're no more than ignored side-shows.

[madmax]

27. That's why I'm not so quick to dismiss the net

and the hackers as a viable means to 'disrupt' the status quo. Hoses, dogs and chain link fences can't stop them.

Things change if they didn't we'd still be fighting wars with a cavalry instead of tanks.

[pipi_k]

25. Except that in other times...

it wasn't innocent people who weren't involved in any of it who got hurt.

Unless they were unlucky enough to get caught in a mass protest...maybe on a college campus or out on the street, etc.


Now there are people who just want to peacefully live their lives and go about their business, and it's not only the "bosses" who are getting the headaches and their boats rocked, it's ordinary Americans who only want to do, and mind, their own business.

But they can't, because big brave internet hackers are risking absolutely nothing to cause as much mayhem as possible.

Nope...that bird doesn't fly...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. You have a romanticized view of the good old days.

The idea of the demonstrations was to disrupt the system and cause chaos. And, "innocent" people did get hurt. And, most of us who demonstrated ran like hell when the cops went for us after we pissed them off. We demonstrated because, at that time, demonstrations worked. They don't now. New tactics to disrupt the system are needed.

[pipi_k]

29. there is no "romanticizing" the good old days...

Like I said, yes....innocent people sometimes got injured

But it wasn't possible for someone halfway across the world to be injured. As far as I remember, someone actually had to BE there to be injured.

and again...I stated that protesters risked life and limb to do what they did.


I'm not sure how anyone could think that's "romanticizing" the Good Old Days. It was nasty and deadly for lots of people.

And as I pointed out elsewhere, the most that's being risked by today's hackers is carpal tunnel or eyestrain. They should be ashamed to put themselves in the same category as Civil Rights protesters from 40+ years ago.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. The point of the demonstrations was to disrupt the system. Not get injured.

Or, killed as they did in some instances.

The point was to change things. In order to do that we had to use the most effective means. In the '60/'70s it was demonstrations. With the advent of "Free Speech" cages and a media that has a ho-hum attitude about demonstrations they have become ineffective. Shutting down Visa and MasterCard got worldwide attention.

You make it sound like we went out there to get our heads bashed in by the cops or sent to jail. The demonstrations were a tool just as the internet is a tool.

[Bluerthanblue]

21. what a bunch of hooey- and a dis to those who put their lives on

the line for civil-rights.

What ever your feelings about Wikileaks, this comparison is garbage.

I know individuals who fought for civil-rights, who left the comfort of their homes and faced the hatred, bigotry and violence head on. These key-board warriors are nothing like them.

That they could seriously equate themselves is a sad commentary on how little they really do understand.

[pipi_k]

28. Diss and more...

It's spitting in their faces... a kick in the ass...

What did Rosa Parks risk by refusing to give up her seat on the bus that day? Possible death, that's what...

What are those hackers risking? Nothing. Zip. Nada.


Yet people are comparing them to Civil Rights protesters?

It's nauseating.

and for some strange reason, they just don't understand.

[struggle4progress]

33. "A huge mob gathered, with open police support while the three of us sat there for three hours.

I was attacked with fists, brass knuckles and the broken portions of glass sugar containers, and was burned with cigarettes. I'm covered with blood and we were all covered by salt, sugar, mustard, and various other things."
Woolworth sit-in, Jackson, MS. May 28, 1963
http://www.crmvet.org.nyud.net:8090/crmpics/sit-in.jpg
http://www.crmvet.org/images/imgcoll.htm

In reactions to the 60s civil rights protests, people were shot or beaten or attacked by firehose; home and churches were set afire or bombed; there was the constant threat of violent mob action by the segregationists

[Odin2005]

35. Cyber-Guerillias.

:woohoo:

[mstinamotorcity]

36. Why is it every movement

that someone thinks needs advocating they compare it to the civil rights movement??? Give me a fucking break!!!!!!!

[toddaa]

37. hacktivism?

DDoS using IRC bots is not hacking. Any moron using LOIC is broadcasting their IP to the servers they attack. My guess is that the app was coded up between requests for sauce by some btard looking to see how many clueless morons he could get sent to jail.

If you don't know how TCP works, stop calling what you do "hacktivism" and go back to playing with your iJunk.