'Anonymous' says it cyberattacked federal government to protest Bill C-51

[applegrove]

'Anonymous' says it cyberattacked federal government to protest Bill C-51

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/anonymous-says-it-cyberattacked-federal-government-to-protest-bill-c-51-1.3117360

"SNIP..............


The online hacker group Anonymous has claimed responsibility for a cyberattack on federal government websites, in protest against the recent passing of the government's anti-terror Bill C-51.

"Today, Anons around the world took a stand for your rights," the group wrote Wednesday afternoon in an online post

"Do we trade our privacy for security? Do we bow down and obey what has become totalitarian rule? Don't fool [yourselves]. The Harper regime does not listen to the people, it acts only in [its] best interests."

A number of federal government websites appear to be back online after the brief blackout, including websites for the Senate, the Justice Department and Canada's spy agencies, CSEC and CSIS.



..............SNIP"

[applegrove]

1. Why does anonymous focus on Canada. Are there not human rights abuses going on all over the world?

Why not pick on North Korea? Russia? ISIL?

[Joe Shlabotnik]

2. Glad they are doing it,

but I gather that they multitask quite well, its just drastically under-reported by our mainstream media.

[applegrove]

3. I don't like them. I'm a safety girl. I like law and order. I resent that this extra-governmental

organization has anointed themselves the boss of my government. I don't always agree with this government but I only want to see their policy replaced by elections or public outcry.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

4. I understand.

However I'd wager that 'Anonymous', as relates to the protest culture in Canada, is not some shady group of foreign jihadists so much as maybe your next door neighbour's 20 year old son or daughter. And the fact that they appear so adept at undermining federal websites for the purposes of protest, helps illustrate to the public, the great expense and poor value our government gets for its own cyber security. As well it underscores the hypocrisy of a government who justifies removing freedoms 'to keep us safe', let alone account for the vast and growing amount of data it has on each citizen.

[arikara]

5. The people are supposed to be the boss of the government

The laws this govt brought in make that less possible. All anonymous did is illustrate how useless their anti terrorist bullshit is, they can't even prevent the simplest form of hacking. Yet they use their laws to seal documents they don't want to embarass them. I listened to an interview of a journalist who knows what this is about and she said it definitely is of interest to the public, and could affect the election. But she is under court order to not disclose.

Sorry I'm on my tablet and no good sharing links, but have a boo at the canada.com story called federal government to invoke terrorism clause to keep Harper family secrets private.

That's what they do with their terrorism bullshit... Whitewash Harper.

[OnlyBernieBurnsBush]

7. This government does not have the consent of the government.

As long as the Tories are winning 39% of the vote and adopting policies that 70% of the country dislikes, let Anonymous kick their ass.

[applegrove]

8. Anonymous, or this same person, is fighting to keep some kid who made crank SWAT calls across North

America out of jail. Innocent people could have been killed.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

9. 'Swatting' appears to be a useful tactic

in exposing the over-the-top, military funded and equipped, jackbooted reactionary force, (often used for political brownie points) that lurks more and more places all the time now: to the masses. This kid may be useful to the greater good of society some day.

[applegrove]

10. People could have died!

[Joe Shlabotnik]

11. Of course

And that would have underscored the militarized, hair trigger response to propagandist induced RW hysteria, Needs to be re-thought and drastically restrained. Lets not turn ourselves into a nation of cowards.

[applegrove]

12. The SWAT team may have been needed somewhere else. How bout that?

[Joe Shlabotnik]

13. Well, possibly,

but likely not. They may have gone rushing off to another non-bomb-threat. Or they may have kicked in the wrong door and shot up an elderly couples dog, backing up a stupid drug warrant execution.

C'mon we need to de-escalate the fear. Spread education.

[applegrove]

15. We are far, far apart my friend.

[polly7]

6. I'm glad Anonymous is paying attention to issues here, too.

So many Canadians are completely apolitical, imo. News like this might get more to pay attention.