Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by garzy, Mar 28, 2003.
read the story regarding the hackers who are disrupting the Al-Jazeera web site operations
Yeah, as did I. This is the article I just read;
Hackers deface Al-Jazeera site
MARCH 28, 2003
HACKERS replaced the English-language website for Arab satellite television network Al-Jazeera with a US flag and the message "Let Freedom Ring". Hours later, the site was hacked again by others.
Hackers calling themselves the "Freedom Cyber Force Militia" earlier hijacked Internet traffic destined for Al-Jazeera's website and redirected it to a different web page on computers operated by Networld Connections, an Internet provider in Salt Lake City. That site was shut down hours later.
The likely hacking technique, called "DNS poisoning", fools traffic-directing computers across the Internet, similar to vandalising exit signs on an interstate to misdirect travelers. It is relatively difficult to defend against.
Internet records show the web directories sending traffic to Al-Jazeera's site were changed early Thursday, apparently without authorisation.
The page later removed also included the message, "God bless our troops", signed by a self-described "Patriot". There was no response to an email sent to an address on the web page.
"Certainly, it has been hacked," acknowledged Jihad Ali Ballout, a spokesman for Al-Jazeera. He described the attack as "a frontal, vicious attack on freedom of the press" and urged anyone with information about the hackers to contact authorities.
Hours later, the site was redirected again to another Internet provider with the message that it was "taken over by Saimoon Bhuiyan".
The Arab network's web site has been suffering disruptions for days, ever since it showed pictures of dead and captive US soldiers in Iraq.
Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar, is an independent voice in the Arab world.
Oh sh*t, sorry, I didn't realise you posted a link.
Interesting, the Al-jazeera website seems to not render properly in Camino, and also its mean to be the english homepage but its in arabic ????
So it's worthwhile to illegally hack an Arabic news organisation but the protesters who engage in civil disobedience and vandalism should be hanged?
Double standards from the pro-war at work again...
amen to that, pseudobrit
No one is saying (at least on these forums) that what happened was right or worthwhile. It is an interesting news item.
Re: Anti-war riots:
Your rights are yours to exercize so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. Numerous Supreme Court rulings have established this. Protestors who lay on train tracks or enter a military installation illegally forfeit their rights through their illegal actions. If you have issues with those laws then get involved in the political process and make it legal for people to do stuff like that.
The title to this thread is "a worthwhile hax."
yes, and the same could be said of civil rights protesters... i personally wouldn't argue that they are setting themselves up to be arrested. though they don't deserve to be physically abused or anything.
Then take it up with the author of the thread and don't lump the entire "pro-war" movement with the actions of a single person.
I do find it rather amusing that these "peace marches" have a tendency to turn violent.
Just as I find it amusing that we need to free the Iraqi people from a nasty killer by killing them nastily.
The world is full of irony.
Why not? Breaking the law is breaking the law. The rights of a protestor do not supercede<sp?> the rights of a non-protestor. I'm not saying people shouldn't protest if they feel the need. I'm saying people should be responsible for their actions and not b*tch and moan if they get arrested for breaking the law while they are protesting.
To clear things up:
Yes, I am appluading the efforts of the individuals who took it upon themselves to deface the al jazeera website
Sorry if you dont feel the same way I do
Then to be fair you would have to support those individuals who took it upon themselves to deface the mini-monuments in France and the protesters who engage in civil disobedience.
Or is commiting a crime only okay when it supports your point of view?
SORRY YOU DONT FEEL THE SAME WAY I DO
edit: wtf dude. i see your second post down there. are you trying to get something started? im not gonna participate in a flame war
Don't feel sorry for me. Feel sorry for yourself if you can't answer the question:
Is commiting a crime okay when it supports your point of view?
Yes it was wrong for those indiviuals to hack into Al-Jazeera's website. That being said, to call this website a "news site" is suspect.. They spread more propanganda than objective news. The coverage on the site blurs the lines between news and commentary. To call Al-Jazeera a news site is like calling Rush Limbaugh's site a news site. Both deal more subjective commentary than anything else.
To call Al Jazeera a news site is to call CNN, Fox and the BBC news sites: they are ALL spouting propaganda.
Although I agree about the first two I have to dispute that the BBC is spouting propaganda. IF oyu listen to BBC world service radio, it is very objective and it spends most of the time not only relaying the latest news from iraq but it has all sorts of experts with all sorts of different opinions in its war analysis programs. I listen to it when it takes over radio 4 in early mornings, between about 2 and 4 am GMT. I dunno how you get it in the US but its always broadcast on BBC radio 4's frequency's early mornings, I even have it on digital
Edit: btw I am in the anti-war camp and thats why I listen to the BBC cos it is very objective compared to the other TV and radio news in this country which just sings the praises of evey good thing in favour of the generals and US/UK and jsut ingores the little embarrassing things, or puts spin on them, eg. the bomb dropped on the market in bagdad, most news networks stated that, "the coalition is looking into the cause of this but they say it is unlikely it was them" whereas the bbc state "the coalition is investigating whether or not the bomb was them, looking at data to see if anything could have gone wrong to cause this" no comment about it either being or not being them. Thats why I listen to it.
So what you are saying ist hat you honestly would rather have Al Jezeera's web site showing horribly graphic images of executed Americans than to have the American flag? Yes, it is a crime to hack a web site, but for the love of God, we are not talking about ruining commerce or destroying anything here, we are talking about the removal of a bunch of pictures which had no place being there to begin with. It is as much a peaceful protest as blocking city streets and bridges. No one got hurt, and a message was sent, and it was every bit as illegal as the civil disobedience of the anti-war protests.
> yes Gus. I would honestly rather have pictures of POWs on Al-Jazeera's website than condone the hijacking of a website solely because it's anti-American. This type of unequal treatment has been the cause for numerous unpleasant memories in our nation's history. If you condone this action, then a hijacking of CNN.com must be perfectly fine for you, too.
> I'm sorry, totalr0xx0r, but your cyberheroes are nothing more than petty vandals, a bunch of neighborhood teens playing a practical joke on the creepy guy down the street.
> The morality and approval of an action should ideally not be based on its conformity with personal opinion. If the act itself, without social context, is illegal, then it is illegal no matter what.
That's my point and I'm sticking to it.