"What Can't we do?"...this is what they are bragging as I type a new blog description for my blog. They are extremists and are bragging HERE AT U-C-L-A "we can get away with anything." What CAN't they DO???? their words!
June 16, 2015
FBI PUT ANONYMOUS 'HACTIVIST' JEREMY HAMMOND ON TERRORIST WATCHLIST...Sylvia Lydia Morelos, 06/16/15...3:14 p.m.
Civil liberties groups concerned at US government’s definition of terrorist
Jeremy Hammond wrote that hackers ‘are condemned as criminals without
consciences, dismissed as anti-social teens without a cause, or hyped as
cyber-terrorists to justify the expanding surveillance state’.
Photograph: AP
The prominent Anonymous “hacktivist” Jeremy Hammond, who participated
in some of the hacking collective’s most audacious cyber acts, was
placed by the FBI on a terrorism watchlist, the Daily Dot reported on
Monday.
The internet news website obtained a leaked document
from the New York state division of criminal justice services that
shows Hammond was classified as a “possible terrorist organisation
member”. The document
is marked “destroy after use” and includes the instruction: “Do not
advise this individual that they are on a terrorist watchlist.”
The document obtained by the Daily Dot, which is dated from around
the time of Hammond’s arrest, suggests that he was put on a central
terrorism watchlist compiled by the FBI known as the Terrorist Screening
Database. The documents do not spell out what justification, if any,
the federal agency offered for including Hammond on the list, raising
the possibility that the FBI designated him a possible terrorist by dint
of his role as a so-called “hacktivist” within Anonymous.
Civil liberties groups said they were concerned that a hacker with no
apparent history of terrorist behaviour or affiliations should be
classified in this way.
“This raises questions about the US government’s definition of
terrorism and whether they have expanded it to including hackers,” said Hanni Fakhoury, a senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Fakhoury said he was curious to know the identity of the “terrorist organisation” mentioned in the documents.
“If it was al-Qaida or Islamic State that would pose no problem for
me, but if they were referring to Anonymous that would be a different
proposition,” he said.
Hammond was arrested in March 2012 and sentenced
in November the following year to 10 years in prison for his part in a
series of high-profile hacks carried out in the name of Anonymous. One
of the largest of those breaches in which Hammond played a leading role
was the release of five million emails from the private intelligence
firm Stratfor.
He was prosecuted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).
There was never any suggestion during the proceedings that he was
involved in any activities related to terrorism or terrorist
organisations.
Hammond has always insisted he is an activist and not a criminal, let alone a terrorist. In a recent opinion article for the Guardian, he argued that he and his fellow hackers were misunderstood.
“We are condemned as criminals without consciences, dismissed as
anti-social teens without a cause, or hyped as cyber-terrorists to
justify the expanding surveillance state. But hacktivism exists within
the history of social justice movements,” he wrote.
A representative of the Terrorist Screening Center, which administers
the database, said the centre “does not publicly confirm nor deny
whether any individual may be included in the US government’s Terrorist
Screening Database (TSDB). Disclosure of an individual’s inclusion or
non-inclusion in the TSDB would significantly impair the government’s
ability to investigate and counteract terrorism.”
The guidelines
governing terrorism watchlists are overseen by an inter-agency
committee within the US National Counterterrorism Center. They are cast
very wide to include “acts dangerous to human life, property or
infrastructure” that are “intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian
population” or “affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction”.
Hugh Handeyside of the American Civil Liberties Union’s national
security project said the US government’s approach to the watchlists was
problematic on several levels.
“It involves a very broad definition of terrorism, has a poorly
defined standard of ‘reasonable suspicion’ that has numerous exemptions,
and has no meaningful way to seek redress,” he said.
Of course, What's missing is that he has
attacked and stolen credit card information before - was convicted in
2006 of stealing the credit card info of a political group he didn't
like (Protest Warrior) but was arrested before he could use them (he did
use the credit card numbers he got at Stratfor).
Or that people who
were his victims were then targeted when they spoke out against him
(everything from pizza/chinese-bombing to SWATing - when one of his
victims testified to this, he smirked.
Perhaps most tellingly, though, he's also got violence convictions.
He stormed into a restaurant with some 'friends', trashed the place and
assaulted people, because the didn't like what a guy (a customer they
had tracked down) said. Or his Felony Mob Action conviction for his
activities in Chicago's Daley Plaza after the city didn't get the 2016
Olympic bid.
He's no shrinking violet, just tapping some keys. He is a typical
middle-class boy of privilege, who has always done what he wants, and
threatened those who doesn't go along with him. and he's not adverse to
using violence (and threats of violence) to try and get others to change
to his beliefs, and isn't THAT, at its core, what terrorism is about?
The whole Anonymous thing is a smoke-screen, he's not been part of
it, for a while, and Anonymous has been singularly useless at anything
except spouting rubbish for years anyway. Operation Payback, Avenge
Assange, Ferguson, etc. Whole bunch of utterly useless noise.
>"he did use the credit card numbers he got at Stratfor"
You
are wrong. Jeremy did nothing with those cards, therefor your premise
is a lie. Please refrain from spreading lies in order to smear a great
individual.
I couldn't even finish reading your statements because they are so
far from the truth. Jeremy is not a violent person. You are spouting
ignorance and I have given you more attention than you deserve.
I think both you and I know he is not a
terrorist in the sense that most people think of. Its a dangerous
widening of the definition.
I think we all forget that South Africa branded Nelson Mandella a
terrorist too. When you start classifying activists as terrorists its a
slippery slope.
No comments:
Post a Comment