Defending Indymedia
Tags: blogs, New Media.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
A pinko site, but the Justice Department had no business asking this:
In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.
The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site “not to disclose the existence of this request” unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.
Indeed, it does. In the end, Justice was scared off by lawyers for the web site – but it is this sort of thing which keeps all of us on edge. Its no one’s business (heck, not even mine, unless you comment) who comes to this or any other website. While I hope that not a single creep will ever view Blogs for Victory, its not for me to stop them – nor to tell anyone that they did come by, should I have that knowledge. Are we going to indict the local Ft. Hood newspaper because Hasan read it?
It would be one thing if a web site was advocating violence or being used as a place to plot law breaking – but if its just a bunch of opinions, even if the opinions are considered idiotic, then its all good – and Government should just keep out.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
21 Responses to “Defending Indymedia”
Caucus of Corruption
The White House and Justice cannot seem to handle free speech nor can it tolerate dissenting opinion.
BIg Brother is watching…….
Truly pathetic for the “new kind of politician” and one who claimed that he will sit down with critics and “reach out for common ground”.
What a liar.
The new American nazis, are kindred to the new black panthers. BEWARE trouble is coming. This guy is a left wing paranoid regime.
tired,
The subpoena was signed on January 23rd, 2009, three days after Obama was sworn in. This was done by the previous administration and dropped by the current one.
kmg1 says: November 11th, 2009 at 8:33 am
_
the wingnuts are the only one’s surprised by that factoid.
this reeks of the bush justice dept “defending freedom” under the patriot act.
BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT BUSH DID IT
There–I think I have covered the RRL whining points for a couple of hours.
On the surface,this looks like hypersensitivity to criticism followed by an effor to silence the oppositional press.
Unfortunately, that is also the spin of the thread post,
But as we know, the internet and some web sites are being used to recruit terrorists, to pass messages among terror cells, and to plan terrorist attacks.
Therefore, given the small amount of information available, it is just as possible that the former administration had viable information that this site was used in a way that threatened national security, that their subpoena was not based on an effort to silence political opposition but to protect national security, and that the same guy who gave armed New Black Panthers a pass on voter intimidation also gave a terrorist communication site a Get Out Of Jail card.
Not saying he did, just pointing out the utter stupidity of BUSH DID IT as a knee jerk response to anything that happens.
So, RRL, do you know WHY the subpeona was issued?
orrin, when the actions of the government to protect the LIVES of Americans from attack here and abroad cover wild-eyed kneepad Libs like you as well as rational and intelligent people, as they do, you are pretty stupid to whine about them.
You sneer about Bush “defending freedom” with apparent total ignorance of the fact that this includes the freedom to LIVE.
Scan down a few threads to find the Usual Suspects bleating that Bush did not do enough to protect Americans from a radical Muslim military officer. So which way do you want to flop on this? You all still carry on with your pathetic lies about how Bush was warned about 8/11 and did nothing about it, you claim Bush should have stopped this major before he killed people, and out the other side of your sneering mouths you decry any effort to actually ENACT security measures.
Let a terrorist attack be planned online and all we will hear from the mindless will be the frantic bleating of BUSH SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING !!!!!!
Your intellectual dishonesty is really reprehensible.
Amazona,
No one knows why the subpoena was issued, not even indymedia. This is what is known:
– It was a grand jury subpoena that was signed three days after Obama was sworn in.
- It was sought and executed by a Bush-appointed AG.
- It was signed two weeks before Holder was confirmed by the Senate.
I would hope for the sake of intellectual honesty you would take tired and fmr to task for falsely screaming, “OBAMA DID IT!”
Amazona says: November 11th, 2009 at 11:44 am
please allow me to “bleat” that even mark is concerned about this bush justice intrusion into the free press.
jheeze louise, I swear bush could pied-piper u wingnuts right off a cliff…
…as u fell screaming “where’s the ground”…to be answered “traitor!”.
I was referring to other cases not this specific one – ha! You fell for my trap.
Other cases since the Obamateur and Holder took the reigns. Other cases like this one.
If you are so concerned with the actions of Bush and his appointee, why aren’t you concerned with the same actions of the Obamateur and company?
Typical.
tired,
Other cases – Good one.
I can’t speak for orrin, but I agree 100% with what Mark posted. It doesn’t matter who is in office. From reading up on this story, it looks like this was done just by the US Attorney’s office. The Bush Justice Department may not have known anything about it. I think the subject is entirely nonpartisan.
Yeah, kmg, other cases of Obamateur’s and others’ war on dissent and free speech, not necessarily legal cases. For example:
On August 27, 2008, respected radio talk show host Milt Rosenberg invited National Review journalist and Ethics and Public Policy Center Senior Fellow, Stanley Kurtz, to his nightly program in Chicago. Kurtz had been conducting thorough and in depth research into Barack Obama’s extensive ties to the radical left, including the fraudulent get-out-the-vote group, ACORN. Kurtz was at that point already investigating Obama’s connection with Bill Ayers and their collaboration on a left-wing education “reform” organization. After Rosenberg’s producer called Obama’s Chicago headquarters to offer airtime to challenge Kurtz’s claims, the Obama campaign declined and instead sent out an Obama Action Wire email to its supporters encouraging them to inundate Rosenberg’s station with complaints and demands that the Kurtz interview be axed. A slew of enraged Obama supporters in fact bombarded the radio station’s switchboard demanding that the interview not go forward. The Obama followers were instructed to report their guerrilla tactics back to the campaign through a special dedicated page on the campaign’s official website.
A few weeks later, the Obama campaign again summoned its army of supporters through another Obama Action Wire, inciting them to once again inundate the same Chicago radio show with calls to deny airtime for an interview with author David Freddoso, author of the book The Case Against Barack Obama. The Obama campaign’s justification for this attack on free speech was that providing Freddoso with airtime would lower the standards of political discourse.
A nonprofit called “Accountable America” that is headed by a former operative of MoveOn.com (which endorsed Obama) has been going through campaign-finance databases and targeting conservative donors with “warning” letters intended to depress Republican fundraising.
The Obama campaign demanded that the U.S. Justice Department stop TV stations from airing an independent ad focusing on Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers. Again, Obama’s followers were summoned to inundate stations with tens of thousands of emails to kill the commercial. What’s more, the Obama campaign has demanded that the Justice Department investigate and prosecute the group that produced the Bill Ayers ad (the American Issues Project) and the man who funded the group (Harold Simmons from Dallas, Texas). Most recently, the attorney for Obama for America has asked the U.S. Attorney General to investigate John McCain, Sarah Palin, and Republican Senators Voinovich and Cornyn and Representatives Bachmann, Blunt and Ryan because of the Republicans’ attempts to draw attention to ACORN’s fraudulent voter registration activities.
These were just from his campaign activities. There have been more:
Town hall meetings concerning health care
Members of his own party who are against his legislation
Fox news
internet blogs
his enemies list
etc. etc.
Obamateur is not tolerating criticism and dissent
tired,
Ah, going with the “fake but accurate” Limbaugh defense. Let’s take your plagiarized, year-old partisan rant one subject at a time:
What did the campaign actually say?
“Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse. Call into the “Extension 720″ show with Milt Rosenberg at (312) 591-7200 (Show airs from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. tonight).”
The campaign asked its supporters to call in during the show to present their side. If they were trying to shut down the interview, maybe they should have had people call before the interview?
You mean these guerrilla tactics?
“Tips for making your call: Be honest, but be civil. Be persistent. It may take a few attempts to get through to the show. Just keep trying. Your call is important. Use the talking points above to help you speak confidently and concisely.”
Oooh, scary.
See above, since the campaign sent out the same request as they did for the Kurtz interview. By the way, one would expect a magazine titled American Thinker to know that only the government is prohibited from restricting speech. If private citizens can influence private companies to not air something, that is not an attack on free speech. That is the free market.
What? Are we playing “Seven Degrees of Separation” now? Accountable America had no connection to the campaign. Besides, the reaction to them by both the left and right was, “Whatever.”
Free speech, right? I thought you were in favor of that.
The campaign charged that the group was illegally advocating for the defeat of a candidate while claiming tax exempt status. It was blatant enough that Fox wouldn’t even run their ad. And if you want to do the guilt by association thing, Simmons was a major McCain and Swift Boat donor.
Actually, they asked the DOJ to investigate whether the White House was colluding with the McCain campaign by improperly leaking information to the press.
The disruptive, anti-speech activities were orchestrated by Dick Armey and his Teabaggers. Obama had nothing to do with them. (And if anyone is offended by the term teabaggers, then Michael Steele shouldn’t have encouraged people to send teabags to Congress.)
Explain how he has “silenced” anyone. It seems the Democrats have been pretty vocal lately in opposition to the White House. And asking a group not to run an ad is not “silencing.” That is asking and the administration didn’t even get what they asked for.
Are you joking? Who from Fox News has been a casualty of Obama’s “war on dissent and free speech?” Is Beck in Gitmo? Has Hannity been spirited off to a black site for enhanced interrogation? Pointing out the fact that Fox News is biased towards Republicans is an assault on free speech? Really?
WTF, etc.? Your ODS is hilarious when you have to dredge up an article that is over a year old to complain about perfectly legal tactics the Obama campaign used to combat what they believed to be lies and smears.
Too funny to try to shift the “fake but accurate” silliness onto Limbaugh. Not that I blame you for wanting to get it out of Lib territory, but sorry, the Lemming Left OWNS that statement.
orrin is simply moronic.
“So we stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway.” – Rush Limbaugh on the Obama Thesis Hoax, Oct 23rd, 2009.
kmg,
I think you should look up the word “joke” in the dictionary. It would clarify things a bit.
kmg, what the hell are you talking about? You are obsessed with Limbaugh. None of my examples come from him. They were taken from several news sources over the past year.
These examples show Obamateur’s intolerance for truth (not his), criticism and dissent.
It is not my fault that you and he cannot stand to be proven wrong nor take any criticism.
Did I say Fox news was a casualty. No, but it is a target of the Obamateur and his minions simply for reporting the truth and the fact that they do not kiss his ass like the other talking heads and their networks.
Poor kmg, can’t stand it when his guy gets caught trying to stifle criticism and dissent. He can stand the fact that the emperor has been revealed to wearing no clothes.
Poor tiredoflibs, can’t stand it when he jumped the gun and got caught.
Mark,
I understand. If a Republican says something stupid, it is a joke. If a Democrat says it, he really meant it in his heart of hearts.
kmg – remember limbaugh et al are only entertainers so dont hold them to standards which require accuracy.
personally I prefer colbert & stewart who are much more humorous entertainers.
dream on, kmg.
Keep up the same fantasy that Obamateur expected. He did not realized that the job was filled with responsibilities – all he saw were the perks.
How dare we, Fox news and others reveal that he is not LEADING on any issue. He is sitting in the wings voting “present” until the perceived popular coarse of action is revealed.
kmg, you can continue to attempt to spin the truth, but you only appear more foolish.
tired,
I never said you got your examples from Limpballs. I said you were using his “false but accurate” defense.
And your claim that your examples “were taken from several news sources over the past year” is pure BS. They were taken verbatim from this article: http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/obama_to_critics_just_shut_up.html
Keep digging.