Indymedia and the disinfo wars
Sam | 22.02.2009 23:38 | SHAC | Animal Liberation | Indymedia | Repression | Cambridge
Due to the nature of open publishing the Indymedia network has been vulnerable to malicious disinformation. On saturday IMC UK became the victim of what now appears to have been an elaborate hoax involving a faked email from the real indymedia admin [
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0221-46.html)].
The email made it seem that this admin had acted out of personal prejudice and made an outrageous proposal to block a well known animal rights group from access to open publishing on the indymedia UK site.
It has not yet been confirmed that it was definitely a disinformation attack but there have certainly been many previous examples.
The text below shows the evolution for the apparent hoax within an article that has now been removed from the newswire due to breech of guidelines on questioning moderation decisions.
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0221-46.html)]. The email made it seem that this admin had acted out of personal prejudice and made an outrageous proposal to block a well known animal rights group from access to open publishing on the indymedia UK site.
It has not yet been confirmed that it was definitely a disinformation attack but there have certainly been many previous examples.
The text below shows the evolution for the apparent hoax within an article that has now been removed from the newswire due to breech of guidelines on questioning moderation decisions.
Animal Rights Activists Face Further Ostracism
blink and it's gone | 22.02.2009 15:16 | Animal Liberation | Indymedia | Repression | Cambridge
In the aftermath of the indymedia server seizure, animal rights activists involved in the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) campaign now face the possibility of being deprived access to open publishing on indymedia.
With SHAC activists now serving a total of 60 years in prison for crimes relating to little more than running a campaign website, it is not surprising that there is a sense of panic and paranoia in the air. Last months seizure of an indymedia server in Manchester and the subsequent arrest of a man in Sheffield have worried even people unrelated to animal rights struggles. Now the divide and rule tactics of the police are starting to bare fruit as one long time indymedia admin 'garcondumonde' has proposed blocking SHAC activists posts from the open publishing newswire.
In his proposal to imc-uk-process list ( http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0221-46.html) he accuses animal rights activists of having "overstepped the line" and blames them for the arrest of a server sysadmin. His issue with the SHAC campaign predates both the server seizure and arrest, frequently raising objections against proposals for feature articles about the campaign. In one recent email ( http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-london/2009-February/0221-x8.html) he refers to SHAC activists motives as "despicable".
Given just 24 hours for debate the proposal could set a dangerous legal precedent for indymedia if agreed and raises serious questions about who is administering the UK indymedia site.
blink and it's gone
Additions
Hiding this post
22.02.2009 22:26
Discussion of IMC UK editorial policy happens (as is noted in the thread below) on imc-uk-moderation e-mail list, which is why the post referred to above is on that list. The newswire is a news resource not the place for discussion of the newswire policy (as explained in the editorial guidelines). I sincerely hope everyone who is actually bothered about IMC UK has actually read the editorial guidelines and have taken the time to understand how IMC UK actually works? 24 hours is the usual period to test if there will be any objections to a proposal. Incidentally, the proposal to pre-moderate anything with the word 'shac' in it has been blocked.
random imc admin
Comments
Hide the following 32 comments
no way!
22.02.2009 15:36
FUCK THAT!
whens the deadline and how do we object?
one struggle
It's time to unite not fight
22.02.2009 15:42
This sucks but it's one persons prejudice and probably not the consensus of those who get to decide. I can't believe a decision like this can be given just 24 hours for consideration, especially over a weekend when many people have better things to do than check their emails. Lets hope those with the power to do something about it are paying attention.
Now is the time to come together an unite against this police intimidation, not turn against each other.
@ctivista
Lets act
22.02.2009 15:56
So how does this work then? With less than 24 hours before the decision is made it's obviously not going to be a case of going along to a meeting. Is it just a case of emailing to that mailing list or is it a members only list? It's done on consensus right? so it just needs one of us to write to block it? or is it only certain people who get a voice?
Mandy
too late dealine passed
22.02.2009 16:04
The proposal was 15:23 yesterday so the deadline has passed. Seems an outrageous process to me and I don't know who actually 'gets a vote' anyway. I doubt that ordinary users have a voice in the process as it would be too easy for anyone to block everything and indymedia would come to a standstill so I assume there are people considered members who do get to decide these things. There are a couple of objections in the moderation list but I don't know if they are just ordinary users or people with power.
crosses fingers
It's not Animal Activists - Just SHAC
22.02.2009 16:17
This proposal doesn't suggest that AR activists should be restricted - just those that support SHAC. After all SPEAK just had thier leader jailed for 10 years and didn't react in way that exposed Indymedia to the worst excesses of British justice.
A very sensible suggestion
Guusje ter Horst
I can hardly believe what I am reading
22.02.2009 16:18
I can hardly believe what I am reading from gdm. Although I am not
associated with SHAC I do support the animal rights movement and see them
as fighting at the front line of dissent against repressive
authoritarianism and making considerable sacrifices to that end. Does Indy
UK really want to alienate all animal rights activists? The seizure of the
server is due to the police overstepping the line, not the ARAs.
Presumably you do not support State censorship, or do you? Maybe it is
just your paranoia at play here.
Thank you though for bringing to my attention the buzz word
'autofiltering', aka euphemism for automatic censorship. No doubt the
tardiness in promoting, due to an understandable lack of admins, will also
manifest itself with unhiding, to the point where the unhidden item from
SHAC is just about to disappear below the bottom of the newswire column.
Very convenient!
That said I do really think that Indymedia mostly does a wonderful job,
and so do some of its admins, but I would hate to see it giving in to
pressure and ending up as just another docile addition to the mainstream
media.
Doug
Yet more proof Indymedia supports the state
22.02.2009 16:30
This is yet more proof that Indymedia is slowly but surely beginning to comply with state sponsored censorship, shame on you Indymedia. If this proposal is true and goes ahead I for one will no longer trust Indymedia and abandon it to the depths of the state cesspit where it now apparently belongs.
Me thinks the Indymedia admin that proposed this is working for the other side.
No gods, No masters!
WTF?
22.02.2009 16:33
This is a joke right?
!
Autofiltering and IP logs
22.02.2009 16:44
How would they block shac posters anyway? A poster here http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422330.html?c=all#c216336 suggests that the admins might have SHAC IP addresses already.
That would backup what Tony Gosling has been saying about ALF arrests being down to IP addresses obtained from indymedia. http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=130808
Tor
home Homepage: http://torproject.org
Deadline not yet passed
22.02.2009 16:49
Anyone can object, and the deadline has not yet passed (the time stamp is 7/8 hours different from GMT), see http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-process.
This is not state or Indymedia cencorship, but one volunteer's desire for it over SHAC.
I've just signed up to the IMC Process lists and have placed an objection:
>>>
PS, after realising that 24 hours is not up, I would like to object.
"we reject all systems of domination and discrimination" - Mission Statement
This is clear discrimination against the campaign Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC).
Unless similar measures are proposed for all campaigns, topics, issues and articles that have at one time, knowingly or unknowingly, stepped over the mark, this is quite obviously systematic disrimination against a group of individuals; shactivists.
The Shactivist / Animal Rep
>>>
PS, for anyone interested in helping/writing the SHAC / animal liberation features (or any other for that matter), it would be much appreciated! There are only a few of us working on them, so please join us! Click the link to the features list where you'll find links to wiki pages for collective editing - this is where the features are written and you can propose them from.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
Animal Rep
Lies and damn lies
22.02.2009 17:03
Tony Gosling is no journalist and is just repeating unsubstantiated disinformation on his site as he is a self serving shit stirrer! He's been challenged other his claim that "several ALF people have already been nicked as a result of the Indy logging of IP details" but he just leaves it up there. He's the admin of that site and you have to register to comment and then he just hides and bans you if you challenge him (a bit like here these days).
No activists in the UK have been arrested as a result of IP data from indymedia, animal rights or otherwise!
%£$&
This is not the place to raise these issues
22.02.2009 17:35
Please note that this discussion breaks the publishing rules laid out in the editorial guidelines [linked to from the top of every page]. Compaints about moderation should be sent to the IMC_UK_MODERATION mailing list [see links under contacts at top of every page].
Please also note that only the opinions of recognised members of the editorial collectives are considered when testing for consensus on these proposals.
This article and comments will be hidden.
imcista
Shame the volunteer in question knows so little about history
22.02.2009 17:36
"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
Krop
Me thinks too
22.02.2009 17:40
> Me thinks the Indymedia admin that proposed this is working for the other side.
Probably. The same admin blocked proposals to buy a new server for indymedia UK a couple of years ago which according to the mailing list archives caused major splits and delays after the 2004 server seizure.
sam
I agree, wtf!
22.02.2009 17:42
I tried to send in a complaint, I find it gobsmacking unreal that this would happen. Indymedia would be notsoindymedia wouldnt it. I am SHOCKED to see such a suggestion!
.
Sam
22.02.2009 18:09
> "Probably. The same admin blocked proposals to buy a new server for indymedia UK a couple of years ago which according to the mailing list archives caused major splits and delays after the 2004 server seizure."
Ah yes I'd forgotten that episode, thanks for reminding me. It just seems to be one issue after another with them, suspicious most definitely!
No gods, No masters!
So start your own indymedia...
22.02.2009 18:36
The AR movement, and definately SHAC, pretty much have their own media anyway but how about starting up an animal rights indymedia? Like climate indymedia, perhaps more genuinely autonomous. The movement is certainly big enough and important enough, and regular indymedia folk tend to be surprisingly unsupportive of animal rights.
While we're at it, hey students when you gonna pull together your own indymedia?
IMCista
solidarirty
22.02.2009 18:57
one strugle one fight ............lets fight for the cause ..no animal torture stop the crimes against animals ..doesn tmatter if is shack, a.l.f etc etc etc ..this is one strugle and is one fight ........UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL ..........LETS FIGHT AGAINST THIS POLICE STATE TERROR THAT WE LIVE ................ ANIMAL LIBERATION NOW AND ALWAYS
`brutus
Yeah, great idea
22.02.2009 18:59
Climate indymedia has been such a success lets all just go our own ways and set up our own little special interest ghetto sites. They'll not be picked off by the cops or lost and forgotten to people not already in the know...
what a great idea
NOT
No Gods No Masters
22.02.2009 19:18
A little history. That incident with gdm a few years back was described by other admins at the time as an abuse of process
{ http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2006-July/0720-8o.html} and led to what was described as the 'single biggest technical disaster that the global Indymedia network has ever had, much worse than the earlier London server seizure'. { http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-network/2006-November/1106-7y.html}
Ironic then that this person should be complaining about the disruption bought down on indymedia by the cops when he has personally been so disruptive to the entire indymedia network over the years. This latest incident is an outrage and it's time something was done about these disruptive elements within the network.
gdm > /dev/null
A disinfo attack?
22.02.2009 19:37
mish mish at aktivix.org wote
I note that this email is not signed and has immediately been cross posted to the newswire -
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422645.html
Previous email to this list from gdm has been signed, eg
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0208-od.html
I suspect this is a forged email intended as an attack on indymedia.
I will wait for an email from gdm signed with his usual GPG key - 912F963C
- before believing this email is genuine.
mish
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 06:23:50PM -0500, garcondumonde wrote:
> hello,
>
> over the past month or so, there have been numerous articles posted by
> animal rights activists that have overstepped the line - so much so, they
> have resulted in the seizure of a server and also the arrest of a
> sysadmin. therefore, i am proposing an auto-filter on 'SHAC' be
> implemented. such posts that are then _within_ guidelines may be unhidden,
> as is done with other posts that are autofiltered.
>
> solidarity,
>
> --gdm
sir spam alot
Pull the other one.
22.02.2009 19:56
Typical behavior from indymedia to justify hiding stuff - just label it disinfo and WOOOSH it vanishes from sight to the great hidden sin bin - out of sight out of mind.
Mind you, it's amazing this thread has stayed up so long without even a single comment being hidden which is unheard of recently. At least some admins must be starting to pay attention to our concerns over the secrets and cover ups.
Sammy
Yup, looks like a hoax
22.02.2009 20:02
Check the archives and this gdm guy usually appears as 'Garcon du Monde' not 'garcondumonde' (although a google search of lists.indymedia.org shows that sometimes he does appear as 'garcondumonde') and I've not found any post in which he hasn't provided a pgp signature.
So it looks like a hoax, a blatant attempt to divide us down 'good' activist vs 'bad' activist lines and further alienate animal rights campaigners.
Hold strong everyone, we're all under attack here.
Jeff
Stay calm! was always good advice
22.02.2009 20:02
Guusje ter Horst - After all SPEAK just had thier leader jailed for 10 years and didn't react in way that exposed Indymedia to the worst excesses of British justice.
One arrest and losing a PC isn't the worst excesses of British justice, unjustifiable though it is. Even the SHAC sentences aren't the worst excesses of British justice, torture and killing are. You are also assuming it is a member of SHAC who posted the ammended posts and that seems an unsafe assumption.
Tor - How would they block shac posters anyway?
By removing any post mentioning SHAC seems one obvious way whether you anonymise or not. Most cms software can filter on content.
Sir spam alot - I note that this email is not signed and has immediately been cross posted to the newswire Previous email to this list from gdm has been signed. I suspect this is a forged email intended as an attack on indymedia. I will wait for an email from gdm signed with his usual GPG key - 912F963C - before believing this email is genuine.
If your false email theory is correct - and can you not just email him to check - then it could be an attack not on IM, but upon GDM by a shit-stirrer trying to get him involved in a controversial issue between two exasperated and threatened groups. I noticed earlier his PGP book ratings were suspiciously high up Google, indicating the link has been shared more than most for that site.
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE3FAA20F
Danny
Another reason to use GPG
22.02.2009 20:29
Shows that it's important to use GPG so that your emails can be signed and verified as being written by a particular person, more than the encryption thing. You can see from keyservers that GDM has had a GPG key for at least since 2003 - why would this particular mail not be signed?
Well spotted Mish. Folk shouldn't jump at this bait.
CH
home Homepage: http://gnupg.org/
Disinfo discredits indymedia and all we do
22.02.2009 20:31
If it's a hoax (a 'false flag operation' in the language the more conspiratorial among us so love to use) then it is an attack on indymedia rather than SHAC and this whole thread is part of the battle ground.
Being an open publishing forum indymedia is wide open to such attacks, comes with the territory. If it really wasn't the admin gdm that sent those emails then it demonstrates the danger that transparency brings as those publicly archived mailing list provide a wealth of personal information to be exploited by the devious intent on causing havoc.
As somebody pointed out above, complaining about moderation requires otherwise anonymous site users to also expose themselves on the lists - revealing not only their email address (perhaps a throw away address created for the purpose) but also their IP address and ISP routing.
If this turns out to be a hoax then what steps can be implemented to prevent it happening again? Both the mailing lists and newswire/comments are open to disinfo attacks for different reasons. Can anything be done about it while maintaining indymedia as an open publishing platform?
Lucy
I'm not with GDM but do consider
22.02.2009 20:46
Just how many of you would be prepared to carry the can for Indymedia yourselves? How do you think it was for the poor bastard who's name was given as the contact for the server that was seized - having his home searched and all computers seized? Would any of you offer your own name and address as the Indymedia contact instead if you knew this level of oppression was likely to happen to you everytime someone from shac started thoughtlessly posting home addresses of people and urging others to attack them? I don't really care so much for AR stuff myself as there are far far more important causes such as climate change, deforestation and wars like Gaza etc. Too many ARers are completely obsessed with animals, become ridiculously wound up about them but care little for other humans or the planet. The recent sentences handed out to Shac were wickedly unjust for sure but it's because of previous protests involving stuff like digging up dead bodies and threatening entire families that this government keeps bringing in more and more draconian laws and sentences that then massively affect many other activists pursuing much more worthy causes.
jo
jo
22.02.2009 21:06
If you think the government has brought in these laws because of those ‘humanitarian’ reasons you speak of, you are very naïve. The government has brought in such laws because AR activists are effective and because there is so little solidarity with them that they can test laws out on the AR movement before trying it on the rest of the radical movements.
Also who are you to say which causes are most important. One struggle, one fight.
Eco
Double False Flag
22.02.2009 21:15
COME ON, WAKE UP!!
Sure the email is a hoax, an obvious hoax, TOO OBVIOUS!!
This is a double false flag designed to look like an indymedia admin being faked to discredit indymedia but really IT IS FROM INDYMEDIA!!!!
Indymedia admins have been working overtime trying to COVER UP their secret logging of ip addresses by hiding anyone that dare mention it and DELETING archived emails that threaten to EXPOSE the truth.
A common tactic when challenged over outrageous CENSORSHIP is to claim it's all part of a DISINFO WAR and just like the governments around the world, this variation on the war on terror enables INDYMEDIAS RULING ELITE to justify their unaccountability.
By creating a CONVENIENT HOAX at this time, they hope to distract us from the ongoing cover up by claiming that it too has all been part of an elaborate campaign to discredit indymedia.
No doubt I'll now have my ip addressed BLOCKED for daring to speak the truth but mark my words and WAKE UP to what is going on.
truthout
home Homepage: http://www.rinf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7619
either trust the admin collective or get involved
22.02.2009 22:02
Indymedia is run by an open collective of volunteers. Anyone can get involved, so if you have constructive criticism, or have ideas about how to improve things, please get involved. You can do this via the local indymedia collectives, or via the email lists:
http://lists.indymedia.org/
We are part of the movements, so please don't jump down our throats with paranoid conspiracy theories without stopping to check a few facts. After all the work that indymedia activists have done for these movements, the least people can do is assume good faith.
We are a bunch of individuals with different backgrounds and opinions; we often disagree and have debates about things. Even if the IMC admin in question did send that email proposal (which I doubt very much) it does not reflect on indymedia as a whole; the rest of the group would not allow such an proposal to go through unchallenged.
There are of course people who are not part of our movements who are simply here to disrupt. We should be aware of that, but not let it panic us to the point of paranoia. The best way to tell is to examine whether someone's criticism is constructive or not.
frustrated IMCer
Oh ok then
22.02.2009 22:38
> either trust the admin collective or get involved
Nice sentiment but when other people suggested the same thing their post was hidden. Likewise for the person who pointed out that getting involved might not be that easy as some collective 'closed ranks' after the sysadmin arrest and moved towards secret meetings.
~ http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421827.html?c=all#c215513
> the least people can do is assume good faith.
Hard to assume good faith when there has clearly been a massive abuse of power in an attempt to cover up admins use of ip logging and any discussion of what should be done about it.
~ http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421703.html?c=all#c215515
~ http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422330.html?c=all
another frustrated IMCer
DID YOU BLINK?
22.02.2009 22:42
NO THE ADMINS HAVE HAD ENOUGH - THIS THREAD IS NOW HIDDEN - NO MORE DISCUSSION THIS SUBJECT IS NOW OFFICIALLY BANNED
NOW ITS GONE!
blink and it's gone | 22.02.2009 15:16 | Animal Liberation | Indymedia | Repression | Cambridge
In the aftermath of the indymedia server seizure, animal rights activists involved in the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) campaign now face the possibility of being deprived access to open publishing on indymedia.
With SHAC activists now serving a total of 60 years in prison for crimes relating to little more than running a campaign website, it is not surprising that there is a sense of panic and paranoia in the air. Last months seizure of an indymedia server in Manchester and the subsequent arrest of a man in Sheffield have worried even people unrelated to animal rights struggles. Now the divide and rule tactics of the police are starting to bare fruit as one long time indymedia admin 'garcondumonde' has proposed blocking SHAC activists posts from the open publishing newswire.
In his proposal to imc-uk-process list (
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0221-46.html) he accuses animal rights activists of having "overstepped the line" and blames them for the arrest of a server sysadmin. His issue with the SHAC campaign predates both the server seizure and arrest, frequently raising objections against proposals for feature articles about the campaign. In one recent email ( http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-london/2009-February/0221-x8.html) he refers to SHAC activists motives as "despicable". Given just 24 hours for debate the proposal could set a dangerous legal precedent for indymedia if agreed and raises serious questions about who is administering the UK indymedia site.
blink and it's gone
Additions
Hiding this post
22.02.2009 22:26
Discussion of IMC UK editorial policy happens (as is noted in the thread below) on imc-uk-moderation e-mail list, which is why the post referred to above is on that list. The newswire is a news resource not the place for discussion of the newswire policy (as explained in the editorial guidelines). I sincerely hope everyone who is actually bothered about IMC UK has actually read the editorial guidelines and have taken the time to understand how IMC UK actually works? 24 hours is the usual period to test if there will be any objections to a proposal. Incidentally, the proposal to pre-moderate anything with the word 'shac' in it has been blocked.
random imc admin
Comments
Hide the following 32 comments
no way!
22.02.2009 15:36
FUCK THAT!
whens the deadline and how do we object?
one struggle
It's time to unite not fight
22.02.2009 15:42
This sucks but it's one persons prejudice and probably not the consensus of those who get to decide. I can't believe a decision like this can be given just 24 hours for consideration, especially over a weekend when many people have better things to do than check their emails. Lets hope those with the power to do something about it are paying attention.
Now is the time to come together an unite against this police intimidation, not turn against each other.
@ctivista
Lets act
22.02.2009 15:56
So how does this work then? With less than 24 hours before the decision is made it's obviously not going to be a case of going along to a meeting. Is it just a case of emailing to that mailing list or is it a members only list? It's done on consensus right? so it just needs one of us to write to block it? or is it only certain people who get a voice?
Mandy
too late dealine passed
22.02.2009 16:04
The proposal was 15:23 yesterday so the deadline has passed. Seems an outrageous process to me and I don't know who actually 'gets a vote' anyway. I doubt that ordinary users have a voice in the process as it would be too easy for anyone to block everything and indymedia would come to a standstill so I assume there are people considered members who do get to decide these things. There are a couple of objections in the moderation list but I don't know if they are just ordinary users or people with power.
crosses fingers
It's not Animal Activists - Just SHAC
22.02.2009 16:17
This proposal doesn't suggest that AR activists should be restricted - just those that support SHAC. After all SPEAK just had thier leader jailed for 10 years and didn't react in way that exposed Indymedia to the worst excesses of British justice.
A very sensible suggestion
Guusje ter Horst
I can hardly believe what I am reading
22.02.2009 16:18
I can hardly believe what I am reading from gdm. Although I am not
associated with SHAC I do support the animal rights movement and see them
as fighting at the front line of dissent against repressive
authoritarianism and making considerable sacrifices to that end. Does Indy
UK really want to alienate all animal rights activists? The seizure of the
server is due to the police overstepping the line, not the ARAs.
Presumably you do not support State censorship, or do you? Maybe it is
just your paranoia at play here.
Thank you though for bringing to my attention the buzz word
'autofiltering', aka euphemism for automatic censorship. No doubt the
tardiness in promoting, due to an understandable lack of admins, will also
manifest itself with unhiding, to the point where the unhidden item from
SHAC is just about to disappear below the bottom of the newswire column.
Very convenient!
That said I do really think that Indymedia mostly does a wonderful job,
and so do some of its admins, but I would hate to see it giving in to
pressure and ending up as just another docile addition to the mainstream
media.
Doug
Yet more proof Indymedia supports the state
22.02.2009 16:30
This is yet more proof that Indymedia is slowly but surely beginning to comply with state sponsored censorship, shame on you Indymedia. If this proposal is true and goes ahead I for one will no longer trust Indymedia and abandon it to the depths of the state cesspit where it now apparently belongs.
Me thinks the Indymedia admin that proposed this is working for the other side.
No gods, No masters!
WTF?
22.02.2009 16:33
This is a joke right?
!
Autofiltering and IP logs
22.02.2009 16:44
How would they block shac posters anyway? A poster here
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422330.html?c=all#c216336 suggests that the admins might have SHAC IP addresses already. That would backup what Tony Gosling has been saying about ALF arrests being down to IP addresses obtained from indymedia.
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=130808 Tor
home Homepage:
http://torproject.org Deadline not yet passed
22.02.2009 16:49
Anyone can object, and the deadline has not yet passed (the time stamp is 7/8 hours different from GMT), see
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-process. This is not state or Indymedia cencorship, but one volunteer's desire for it over SHAC.
I've just signed up to the IMC Process lists and have placed an objection:
>>>
PS, after realising that 24 hours is not up, I would like to object.
"we reject all systems of domination and discrimination" - Mission Statement
This is clear discrimination against the campaign Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC).
Unless similar measures are proposed for all campaigns, topics, issues and articles that have at one time, knowingly or unknowingly, stepped over the mark, this is quite obviously systematic disrimination against a group of individuals; shactivists.
The Shactivist / Animal Rep
>>>
PS, for anyone interested in helping/writing the SHAC / animal liberation features (or any other for that matter), it would be much appreciated! There are only a few of us working on them, so please join us! Click the link to the features list where you'll find links to wiki pages for collective editing - this is where the features are written and you can propose them from.
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features Animal Rep
Lies and damn lies
22.02.2009 17:03
Tony Gosling is no journalist and is just repeating unsubstantiated disinformation on his site as he is a self serving shit stirrer! He's been challenged other his claim that "several ALF people have already been nicked as a result of the Indy logging of IP details" but he just leaves it up there. He's the admin of that site and you have to register to comment and then he just hides and bans you if you challenge him (a bit like here these days).
No activists in the UK have been arrested as a result of IP data from indymedia, animal rights or otherwise!
%£$&
This is not the place to raise these issues
22.02.2009 17:35
Please note that this discussion breaks the publishing rules laid out in the editorial guidelines [linked to from the top of every page]. Compaints about moderation should be sent to the IMC_UK_MODERATION mailing list [see links under contacts at top of every page].
Please also note that only the opinions of recognised members of the editorial collectives are considered when testing for consensus on these proposals.
This article and comments will be hidden.
imcista
Shame the volunteer in question knows so little about history
22.02.2009 17:36
"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
Krop
Me thinks too
22.02.2009 17:40
> Me thinks the Indymedia admin that proposed this is working for the other side.
Probably. The same admin blocked proposals to buy a new server for indymedia UK a couple of years ago which according to the mailing list archives caused major splits and delays after the 2004 server seizure.
sam
I agree, wtf!
22.02.2009 17:42
I tried to send in a complaint, I find it gobsmacking unreal that this would happen. Indymedia would be notsoindymedia wouldnt it. I am SHOCKED to see such a suggestion!
.
Sam
22.02.2009 18:09
> "Probably. The same admin blocked proposals to buy a new server for indymedia UK a couple of years ago which according to the mailing list archives caused major splits and delays after the 2004 server seizure."
Ah yes I'd forgotten that episode, thanks for reminding me. It just seems to be one issue after another with them, suspicious most definitely!
No gods, No masters!
So start your own indymedia...
22.02.2009 18:36
The AR movement, and definately SHAC, pretty much have their own media anyway but how about starting up an animal rights indymedia? Like climate indymedia, perhaps more genuinely autonomous. The movement is certainly big enough and important enough, and regular indymedia folk tend to be surprisingly unsupportive of animal rights.
While we're at it, hey students when you gonna pull together your own indymedia?
IMCista
solidarirty
22.02.2009 18:57
one strugle one fight ............lets fight for the cause ..no animal torture stop the crimes against animals ..doesn tmatter if is shack, a.l.f etc etc etc ..this is one strugle and is one fight ........UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL ..........LETS FIGHT AGAINST THIS POLICE STATE TERROR THAT WE LIVE ................ ANIMAL LIBERATION NOW AND ALWAYS
`brutus
Yeah, great idea
22.02.2009 18:59
Climate indymedia has been such a success lets all just go our own ways and set up our own little special interest ghetto sites. They'll not be picked off by the cops or lost and forgotten to people not already in the know...
what a great idea
NOT
No Gods No Masters
22.02.2009 19:18
A little history. That incident with gdm a few years back was described by other admins at the time as an abuse of process
{
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2006-July/0720-8o.html} and led to what was described as the 'single biggest technical disaster that the global Indymedia network has ever had, much worse than the earlier London server seizure'. { http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-network/2006-November/1106-7y.html} Ironic then that this person should be complaining about the disruption bought down on indymedia by the cops when he has personally been so disruptive to the entire indymedia network over the years. This latest incident is an outrage and it's time something was done about these disruptive elements within the network.
gdm > /dev/null
A disinfo attack?
22.02.2009 19:37
mish mish at aktivix.org wote
I note that this email is not signed and has immediately been cross posted to the newswire -
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422645.html Previous email to this list from gdm has been signed, eg
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2009-February/0208-od.html I suspect this is a forged email intended as an attack on indymedia.
I will wait for an email from gdm signed with his usual GPG key - 912F963C
- before believing this email is genuine.
mish
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 06:23:50PM -0500, garcondumonde wrote:
> hello,
>
> over the past month or so, there have been numerous articles posted by
> animal rights activists that have overstepped the line - so much so, they
> have resulted in the seizure of a server and also the arrest of a
> sysadmin. therefore, i am proposing an auto-filter on 'SHAC' be
> implemented. such posts that are then _within_ guidelines may be unhidden,
> as is done with other posts that are autofiltered.
>
> solidarity,
>
> --gdm
sir spam alot
Pull the other one.
22.02.2009 19:56
Typical behavior from indymedia to justify hiding stuff - just label it disinfo and WOOOSH it vanishes from sight to the great hidden sin bin - out of sight out of mind.
Mind you, it's amazing this thread has stayed up so long without even a single comment being hidden which is unheard of recently. At least some admins must be starting to pay attention to our concerns over the secrets and cover ups.
Sammy
Yup, looks like a hoax
22.02.2009 20:02
Check the archives and this gdm guy usually appears as 'Garcon du Monde' not 'garcondumonde' (although a google search of lists.indymedia.org shows that sometimes he does appear as 'garcondumonde') and I've not found any post in which he hasn't provided a pgp signature.
So it looks like a hoax, a blatant attempt to divide us down 'good' activist vs 'bad' activist lines and further alienate animal rights campaigners.
Hold strong everyone, we're all under attack here.
Jeff
Stay calm! was always good advice
22.02.2009 20:02
Guusje ter Horst - After all SPEAK just had thier leader jailed for 10 years and didn't react in way that exposed Indymedia to the worst excesses of British justice.
One arrest and losing a PC isn't the worst excesses of British justice, unjustifiable though it is. Even the SHAC sentences aren't the worst excesses of British justice, torture and killing are. You are also assuming it is a member of SHAC who posted the ammended posts and that seems an unsafe assumption.
Tor - How would they block shac posters anyway?
By removing any post mentioning SHAC seems one obvious way whether you anonymise or not. Most cms software can filter on content.
Sir spam alot - I note that this email is not signed and has immediately been cross posted to the newswire Previous email to this list from gdm has been signed. I suspect this is a forged email intended as an attack on indymedia. I will wait for an email from gdm signed with his usual GPG key - 912F963C - before believing this email is genuine.
If your false email theory is correct - and can you not just email him to check - then it could be an attack not on IM, but upon GDM by a shit-stirrer trying to get him involved in a controversial issue between two exasperated and threatened groups. I noticed earlier his PGP book ratings were suspiciously high up Google, indicating the link has been shared more than most for that site.
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE3FAA20F Danny
Another reason to use GPG
22.02.2009 20:29
Shows that it's important to use GPG so that your emails can be signed and verified as being written by a particular person, more than the encryption thing. You can see from keyservers that GDM has had a GPG key for at least since 2003 - why would this particular mail not be signed?
Well spotted Mish. Folk shouldn't jump at this bait.
CH
home Homepage:
http://gnupg.org/ Disinfo discredits indymedia and all we do
22.02.2009 20:31
If it's a hoax (a 'false flag operation' in the language the more conspiratorial among us so love to use) then it is an attack on indymedia rather than SHAC and this whole thread is part of the battle ground.
Being an open publishing forum indymedia is wide open to such attacks, comes with the territory. If it really wasn't the admin gdm that sent those emails then it demonstrates the danger that transparency brings as those publicly archived mailing list provide a wealth of personal information to be exploited by the devious intent on causing havoc.
As somebody pointed out above, complaining about moderation requires otherwise anonymous site users to also expose themselves on the lists - revealing not only their email address (perhaps a throw away address created for the purpose) but also their IP address and ISP routing.
If this turns out to be a hoax then what steps can be implemented to prevent it happening again? Both the mailing lists and newswire/comments are open to disinfo attacks for different reasons. Can anything be done about it while maintaining indymedia as an open publishing platform?
Lucy
I'm not with GDM but do consider
22.02.2009 20:46
Just how many of you would be prepared to carry the can for Indymedia yourselves? How do you think it was for the poor bastard who's name was given as the contact for the server that was seized - having his home searched and all computers seized? Would any of you offer your own name and address as the Indymedia contact instead if you knew this level of oppression was likely to happen to you everytime someone from shac started thoughtlessly posting home addresses of people and urging others to attack them? I don't really care so much for AR stuff myself as there are far far more important causes such as climate change, deforestation and wars like Gaza etc. Too many ARers are completely obsessed with animals, become ridiculously wound up about them but care little for other humans or the planet. The recent sentences handed out to Shac were wickedly unjust for sure but it's because of previous protests involving stuff like digging up dead bodies and threatening entire families that this government keeps bringing in more and more draconian laws and sentences that then massively affect many other activists pursuing much more worthy causes.
jo
jo
22.02.2009 21:06
If you think the government has brought in these laws because of those ‘humanitarian’ reasons you speak of, you are very naïve. The government has brought in such laws because AR activists are effective and because there is so little solidarity with them that they can test laws out on the AR movement before trying it on the rest of the radical movements.
Also who are you to say which causes are most important. One struggle, one fight.
Eco
Double False Flag
22.02.2009 21:15
COME ON, WAKE UP!!
Sure the email is a hoax, an obvious hoax, TOO OBVIOUS!!
This is a double false flag designed to look like an indymedia admin being faked to discredit indymedia but really IT IS FROM INDYMEDIA!!!!
Indymedia admins have been working overtime trying to COVER UP their secret logging of ip addresses by hiding anyone that dare mention it and DELETING archived emails that threaten to EXPOSE the truth.
A common tactic when challenged over outrageous CENSORSHIP is to claim it's all part of a DISINFO WAR and just like the governments around the world, this variation on the war on terror enables INDYMEDIAS RULING ELITE to justify their unaccountability.
By creating a CONVENIENT HOAX at this time, they hope to distract us from the ongoing cover up by claiming that it too has all been part of an elaborate campaign to discredit indymedia.
No doubt I'll now have my ip addressed BLOCKED for daring to speak the truth but mark my words and WAKE UP to what is going on.
truthout
home Homepage:
http://www.rinf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7619 either trust the admin collective or get involved
22.02.2009 22:02
Indymedia is run by an open collective of volunteers. Anyone can get involved, so if you have constructive criticism, or have ideas about how to improve things, please get involved. You can do this via the local indymedia collectives, or via the email lists:
http://lists.indymedia.org/ We are part of the movements, so please don't jump down our throats with paranoid conspiracy theories without stopping to check a few facts. After all the work that indymedia activists have done for these movements, the least people can do is assume good faith.
We are a bunch of individuals with different backgrounds and opinions; we often disagree and have debates about things. Even if the IMC admin in question did send that email proposal (which I doubt very much) it does not reflect on indymedia as a whole; the rest of the group would not allow such an proposal to go through unchallenged.
There are of course people who are not part of our movements who are simply here to disrupt. We should be aware of that, but not let it panic us to the point of paranoia. The best way to tell is to examine whether someone's criticism is constructive or not.
frustrated IMCer
Oh ok then
22.02.2009 22:38
> either trust the admin collective or get involved
Nice sentiment but when other people suggested the same thing their post was hidden. Likewise for the person who pointed out that getting involved might not be that easy as some collective 'closed ranks' after the sysadmin arrest and moved towards secret meetings.
~
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421827.html?c=all#c215513 > the least people can do is assume good faith.
Hard to assume good faith when there has clearly been a massive abuse of power in an attempt to cover up admins use of ip logging and any discussion of what should be done about it.
~
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421703.html?c=all#c215515 ~
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422330.html?c=all another frustrated IMCer
DID YOU BLINK?
22.02.2009 22:42
NO THE ADMINS HAVE HAD ENOUGH - THIS THREAD IS NOW HIDDEN - NO MORE DISCUSSION THIS SUBJECT IS NOW OFFICIALLY BANNED
NOW ITS GONE!
Sam
Homepage:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422645.html?c=all
