Wikileaks botnet attacks

[ironhammer]

All civil disobedience, and let's be honest here for disobedience this is pretty civil, has its roots in breaking the status quo. While I'm not going to claim that this has the same gravity as the civil rights movement in America, please do remember that Rosa parks was a criminal by the laws of her own time. So yes, what Anonymous is doing is

Comments

[mad_jester]

Couldn't agree more. The simple fact is, when the government or law becomes oppressive, the only recourse is disobedience, be it civil or violent, and the more normalized the corruption, the more violent must needs be the action that sweeps it out. (Can you tell Guy Fawkes is something of a hero of mine?)

But yeah, I have to say that Anonymous (the whole Cheeto-smelling lot of them) is on the right track here. A grassroots (sort of) movement might just be the thing to alert the PTB that the restriction of information, and subsequent demonization of Assange, is unacceptable. Generally I think Anonymous is painfully obnoxious and asinine, but they're clearly the right kind of soldier for this brand of action.

[kangaekaeru]

I'd agree with that, too.
I would wonder what Anon had accomplished, if it appeared that the goal were to cause damage. If they'd wanted to, I think they could have caused some major problems. It looks to me like damage was secondary to getting people to look at the situation, though - looking at, and talking about, what's going on with WikiLeaks.

[ironphoenix]

The trick with civil disobedience is to have the guts to face the consequences of it, and make that part of the action. Before the successfully civil disobedient protester, there are often many unsung ones who were quietly on not-so-quietly hustled away, and they are every bit as important. To be effective, I believe that one must be willing to take even (perhaps even especially) the unfair lumps.