[governance] Tangential / 90,000 Urge Congress NOT to Co-Sponsor CISPA (Swartz - PATRIOT Act for the Internet) + Conflation of Wikileaks by USG
Riaz K Tayob
riaz.tayob at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 12:48:04 EST 2013
*FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE*
February 21, 2013
12:06 PM
*CONTACT: Demand Progress <http://www.demandprogress.org>*
*Email:* info at demandprogress.org <mailto:info at demandprogress.org>
90,000 Urge Congress NOT to Co-Sponsor CISPA
Demand Progress Calls Internet Snooping Bill "the Patriot Act for
the Internet"
WASHINGTON - February 21 - In just 48 hours, more than 90,000 Demand
Progress members have expressed their opposition to the Cyber
Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) which was introduced
last week by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD).
Over the course of 2012, more than 200,000 Demand Progress members
emailed or called Congress in opposition to a previous incarnation of
CISPA and it's Senate counterpart.
Internet users can email their members of Congress by clicking here:
http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/cispa_is_back/
CISPA would encourage companies to gather information about their
customers and users and share that information with the government
without a warrant. It would preempt all existing online privacy laws and
regulations.
Last year, Demand Progress' Aaron Swartz dubbed the legislation the
'Patriot Act of the Internet.'
"An ever more politicized Internet public is making its voice heard yet
again: We've grown tired of the incessant fear-mongering by politicians,
and refuse to accept such infringement of our online privacy rights,"
said Aaron Swartz, last year. "We urge members of Congress to refuse to
cosponsor CISPA, and to vote against it when the time comes."
https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/02/21-0
*Demand Progress* works to win progressive policy changes for ordinary
people through organizing, lobbying, and elections in the United States.
Published on Thursday, February 21, 2013 by Common Dreams
<http://www.commondreams.org>
US Government Conflates Media Outlet Wikileaks with Cyber-Criminals
and 'Hacktivists'
New Obama administration strategy says WikiLeaks might perform
"economic espionage against US companies"
- Jon Queally, staff writer
In what transparency advocates and defenders of free speech see as a
troubling development, the Obama administration on Wednesday released a
multi-agency "strategy"---designed to combat cyber-crime and foreign
espionage---which makes unsettling comparisons to the work of the
government and corporate whistleblower media outlet Wikileaks to
criminal hacking syndicates.
Defenders of Wikileaks call the White House description of the media
outlet as a group of 'hacktivists' as blatantly false. "Disgruntled
insiders [may leak] information about corporate trade secrets or
critical U.S. technology to 'hacktivist' groups like WikiLeaks," the
White House document warns, belying the well established fact that
Wikileaks does not operate as a 'hacking' site but as a clearing house
for leaked documents that acts as a media outlet more than anything else.
According to Wikileaks' own website, it describes itself as is "a
not-for-profit media organization."
Its goal, the group states, "is to bring important news and information
to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for
sources to leak information to our journalists. One of our most
important activities is to publish original source material alongside
our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the
truth."
But, as /CNET/'s Declan McCullagh points out
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57570384-38/white-house-warns-of-dangers-posed-by-wikileaks-lulzsec-other-hacktivists/>,
Wikileak's inclusion in the new strategy document (PDF
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/IPEC/admin_strategy_on_mitigating_the_theft_of_u.s._trade_secrets.pdf>)---one
expected to be focused on "state-sponsored intrusions"---had not been
anticipated.
"Regardless of the US government's prejudice, [Wikileaks] is a media
organization and a publisher, not some "hacktivist" collective. It has a
right to publish just like other news outlets, including those in the
United States that are sometimes incredibly subservient to corporate
interests or the US government." -- Kevin Gosztgola, FireDogLake
"Especially," writes McCullagh, "in the wake of disclosures this week
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57570187-38/chinas-cyberwar-intrusions-are-the-new-normal-faq/>
about the Chinese military's involvement in penetrating the networks of
U.S.-headquartered companies."
McCullagh says that by mentioning Wikileaks---whose founder Julian
Assange remains in holed up the Ecuadorean Embassy in London due to his
fears that the US would like to prosecute him for releasing embarrassing
US government and military documents---the Justice Department "signals
that the government's interest
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20025523-281.html> in WikiLeaks has
not abated."
McCullagh notes that vice president Joe Biden has called
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/19/assange-high-tech-terrorist-biden>
Assange a "high-tech terrorist," and that "a grand jury has been
empaneled
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57546782-38/bradley-manning-offers-partial-guilty-plea-to-military-court/>
in Alexandria, Va., as part of a criminal investigation of the group."
And Kevin Gosztgola, writing at /FireDogLake/, adds
<http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/02/20/white-house-strategy-to-protect-trade-secrets-names-wikileaks-criminalizes-hacktivists/>:
The strategy makes clear that the White House does not consider
WikiLeaks a media organization. It characterizes it as a
"self-styling whistleblowing" organization, but the word
"self-styled" indicates they are not a "whistleblowing organization"
to White House officials.
The organization is listed under a description of hacktivists and
even described as an example of a "hacktivist" organization. This is
blatantly false and malicious because staffers of WikiLeaks are not
known to have hacked into any businesses or organizations to obtain
information. They are not even known to have solicited information
from insiders. All information released has been the result of
submissions from sources they are unable to identify because their
submission system was setup to protect the identity of sources or
the information has been personally handed over by a whistleblower,
who publicly wanted to be identified as the source [as in the case
of Elmer].
Regardless of the US government's prejudice, it is a media
organization and a publisher, not some "hacktivist" collective.
WikiLeaks has a right to publish just like other news outlets,
including those in the United States that are sometimes incredibly
subservient to corporate interests or the US government.
By including WikiLeaks in this strategy, the Obama administration is
seeking to characterize WikiLeaks as an organization that poses a
potential threat to the US economy. Such a characterization is
advantageous to military prosecutors in the court martial of Pfc.
Bradley Manning, who allegedly provided classified information to
WikiLeaks. Manning is charged with "aiding the enemy" by indirectly
providing intelligence to al Qaeda through WikiLeaks. His defense
maintains WikiLeaks is a media organization that should enjoy the
same legal protections the /New York Times /or /Washington Post
/would enjoy, but if the White House is going to cast WikiLeaks as
an actor that might engage in economic espionage, it is much easier
to convince the judge that WikiLeaks is some type of info-terrorist
organization and that Manning should have known the information
could be used to injure the United States.
There is no reasonable justification for including "hacktivists" in
this strategy other than the fact that the White House intends to
further support the targeting of "hacktivists" by law enforcement
and intelligence agencies. "Hacktivists" do not pose any threat to
trade secrets and never will. If they truly are political or social
"hacktivists" and not thiefs, they will not take anything from any
businesses or organizations and they will not destroy any of the
business or organization's website by accessing it through the internet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130221/0dbc370f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: demandprogress.org_-_2011-05-24_-_12h-44m-52s.png
Type: image/png
Size: 47178 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130221/0dbc370f/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 265902-wikileaks_sm.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 16330 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130221/0dbc370f/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list