Homeland Security Demands Mozilla Remove Firefox Extension That Redirects Seized Domains

from the touchy,-huh? dept

Apparently, the folks at Homeland Security are not at all pleased with the very, very simple Firefox extension, called MAFIAAfire, that negates ICE’s domain seizures, by automatically rerouting users to alternate domains. Apparently, DHS demanded that Mozilla take the extension down from its listing of Firefox extensions claiming that the add-on “circumvented” DHS’s seizure orders. Thankfully, Mozilla didn’t just fold, but instead left it up and sent DHS a list of questions concerning the request. The list of questions is really fantastic, as it goes way beyond the direct request to really get to the heart of the questionable nature of ICE’s activity with domain seizures:

To help us evaluate the Department of Homeland Security’s request to take-down/remove the MAFIAAfire.com add-on from Mozilla’s websites, can you please provide the following additional information:

1. Have any courts determined that MAFIAAfire.com is unlawful or illegal in any way? If so, on what basis? (Please provide any relevant rulings)

2. Have any courts determined that the seized domains related to MAFIAAfire.com are unlawful, illegal or liable for infringement in any way? (please provide relevant rulings)

3. Is Mozilla legally obligated to disable the add-on or is this request based on other reasons? If other reasons, can you please specify.

4. Has DHS, or any copyright owners involved in this matter, taken any legal action against MAFIAAfire.com or the seized domains, including DMCA requests?

5. What protections are in place for MAFIAAfire.com or the seized domain owners if eventually a court decides they were not unlawful?

6. Can you please provide copies of any briefs that accompanied the affidavit considered by the court that issued the relevant seizure orders?

7. Can you please provide a copy of the relevant seizure order upon which your request to Mozilla to take down MAFIAAfire.com is based?

8. Please identify exactly what the infringements by the owners of the domains consisted of, with reference to the substantive standards of Section 106 and to any case law establishing that the actions of the seized domain owners constituted civil or criminal copyright infringement.

9. Did any copyright owners furnish affidavits in connection with the domain seizures? Had any copyright owners served DMCA takedown notices on the seized domains or MAFIAAfire.com? (if so please provide us with a copy)

10. Has the Government furnished the domain owners with formal notice of the seizures, triggering the time period for a response by the owners? If so, when, and have there been any responses yet by owners?

11. Has the Government communicated its concerns directly with MAFIAAfire.com? If so, what response, if any, did MAFIAAfire.com make?

It’s always nice to see some organizations not just roll over when the government comes calling. Kudos to Mozilla for not just refusing to takedown MAFIAAfire, but for also asking serious questions of DHS. Of course, DHS has refused to respond at all…

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: mozilla

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Homeland Security Demands Mozilla Remove Firefox Extension That Redirects Seized Domains”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

I know it’s besides the point, but this addon is horrible. If you install it, expect Firefox to crawl to a halt on every single DNS request it has to make; effectively rendering Firefox useless.

Edit your hosts file; simpler and faster.

Oh but yay Mozilla. Even if it sucks. Nice to see them standing up.

That Anonymous Coward says:

but but but … piracy!

do this or off to the gulag with you!

Do they have any idea how quickly information goes around the intertubes? If they seize a domain, it takes about a day for the new domain to be posted to all of the news sites. This extension just made that time shorter.
So I guess the plan is to fight piracy 24 hours at a time?

And hey they managed to create more coverage of the plugin, should they take themselves down for contributing to the problem?

Anonymous Coward says:

Mozilla uses in its email the word “request”, whereas your link uses the word “demand”. The two are not, of course, synonymous.

It is not at all clear if Mozilla could be held legally liable for its extension, but it is clear that as a group located within the US it is generally not a good idea to get “cutesy” with the DHS and the DOJ.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re:

It is not at all clear if Mozilla could be held legally liable for its extension, but it is clear that as a group located within the US it is generally not a good idea to get “cutesy” with the DHS and the DOJ

I find this to be an interesting statement on two levels.

1. I don’t see how requesting that a government agency back up its demands with a legal basis is, in any way, shape or form getting “cutesy” with the government.

2. I find the general sentiment you express here horrifying. You actually think that if the government comes to you and makes a request outside of the law, you should just obey? That seems to run entirely counter to the American way of standing up for what you believe in and not being bullied by the government.

I really find it sad when people who claim to be patriotic Americans really are just willing pawns of authoritarianism.

Jay (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

If I recall correctly, the IRS used to use threatening posture in the 90s to go after people with little to no money.

Congress solved that pretty quickly by taking away their teeth.

Here, we have Mozilla asking a few common sense questions based on a few facts:

1) No court order was given with this demand
2) An inquiry into what harm the plug in is doing to the consumers or the market
3) Is this about censorship, or is this about taking down an opponent of the already controversial seizure domains?

The list could be three questions or it could be dozens, but if DHS doesn’t want to answer the questions listed, THAT should be what we’re focusing on. Mozilla is correct in asking about the validity of this takedown.

Arguing that the list should be only a few questions less is mere semantics.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Perhaps the next time the IRS asks you a question it would be a good time to hit it with a “Mozilla Memo”.

What does the IRS have to do with DHS trying to get Mozilla to take down perfectly legal content?

Here the memo should have been no more than one or two very simple, non-argumentative questions

I’m glad that you know what Mozilla should or should not have done.

However, I’m afraid in my estimation, you are wrong again. Mozilla asked serious questions of a government agency trying to exert greater than justified power. It “should” do exactly what you it did. Just because you like to kowtow to the government, does not mean that everyone else “should.”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

1. As yet, I have not seen a copy of the alleged communication from the DHS to Mozilla (phone call, letter, email, other?). Here the link uses the word “demand”. In the email allegedly sent by Mozilla it uses the word “request”. The best evidence of what started this off is a copy of the initial communication. Without it everything else is mere conjecture.

2. When sending a response to a government agency it is generally not a wise move, even if one is absolutely entitled to do so, to wax poetic with a series of “questions” that serve no useful purpose other than, perhaps, “feeling good” that you did. Generally, the less said the better. Question #3 may very well have been the only one it needed to ask. The writer already knew the answers to most of the others. Thus, they added nothing of relevance and could reasonably be viewed as merely being argumentative.

3. While Mozilla may stand on firm legal ground, at this early stage its legal position cannot be determined with certainty. By being “cutesy” it may embolden the recipient to move forward and test Mozilla’s legal position in court. The goal should be to end the matter here and now, and not to increase in the slightest the possibility that a decision may move to a later date using unknown means.

4. The above is not being unpatriotic, and it is plainly silly to suggest otherwise. It is not bending to the will of the government. It is merely a way to solve a potential problem in a manner that minimizes the possiblity that it later becomes a real problem. Just because one has a “right” to do something does not necessarily mean that it is the “right” or “smart” thing to do under the circumstances.

Lauriel (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Okay, I think I see where you are coming from.

Firstly, let me say that I am not American, so really couldn’t care less if your views are patriotic or not! This, for me, takes out one factor of the argument – nationality. Rather, think globally. This is an issue that concerns everyone, not just America, even though the source individuals/corporations are in the USA.

Secondly, you are arguing from a position of problem resolution. If you are viewing it as a problem that needs to be resolved as quickly, quietly and efficiently as possible, then you are correct. Mozilla’s actions were extremely questionable if this was the goal.

Problem resolution, however, was NOT Mozilla’s goal in this case. Many, Mozilla and MAFIAAfire included, consider what the DHS has been doing as censorship. The sole reason for making this app, as stated by the creator of the MADIAAfire app, was to protest this act of censorship. Mozilla, as a company with a firm belief in open source software, and the ideals on which it is built, is echoing and supporting that protest, as well as making one of it’s own.

Your arguments are 100% correct if Mozilla’s response was aimed at resolving it’s issue with the DHS demand. It is not. It is a public protest, straight up. It isn’t meant to resolve, it is meant to question, probe, and well.. protest the DHS’s actions. An anti-war rally is not meant to resolve a smaller issue, but to protest a larger one. This is Mozilla’s anti-war cry.

PrometheeFeu (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

AFAIK the IRS doesn’t make demands without citing law. If it does make demands without citing laws, asking them to cite law is simply common sense. As far as the cutesy nature, I’m pretty sure Mozilla could fight back pretty hard against the DHS in court. And honestly, the courts will simply have to agree that if the DHS does not cite law, being cutesy in your questions is not an offense.

Jose_X (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Harassment of law-biding citizens who would have the sympathy and appreciation of millions of people? Is that smart? We aren’t talking about a no-name person or an Al Capone. Does the government really want to draw more scrutiny to itself? Does Hollywood really want to draw more attention to this plugin and to their abusive position?

Skeptical Cynic (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Due process is a fundamental right we have in America.

“~nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law~”

Without due process we might as well live in a dictatorship or totalitarian country.

Asking for confirmation that what they are doing is legal and that they have followed due process is not getting “cutesy”.

Gwiz (profile) says:

Re: Re:

…but it is clear that as a group located within the US it is generally not a good idea to get “cutesy” with the DHS and the DOJ.

Asking relevant questions about important issues that effect everyone is not being “cutesy” at all.

It’s called being a good American.

“It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.”
? Benjamin Franklin

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Do they now? I have seen quite a couple of cases of first degree murder/ attempted first degree murder by the US authorities over the past 50 years. And no rule of law authorises those.
And if rule of law prevails in the US, why are so many Americans being harassed/raped/beaten half to death by your figures of authority without any of those figures of authority ever being brought to justice?
Rule of law? My ass!

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: Re:

It is amazing the pedantry that you spout when you have no other basis for a negative argument against IP minimulism.

You and I both know that a legal nastygram such as what DHS/ICE gave Mozilla equates to a demand (you even allude to it in your last line of not getting cutesy) whereas due to this a request from Mozilla towards DHS/ICE is therefore a demand to provide proof of why Mozilla should kowtow to the demands of a Govt organisation when there is No legal requirememt to.

Mozilla can in no way shape or form be held liable for an extension (especially when it is not even their extension but written by a third party) to state otherwise means that providers of Operating Systems (Redhat, Microsoft, etc) could be held liable because people write unwelcome programs that hook into the operating system (You know like programming in C or Assembler)

As for the question on the letter Mozilla wrote to DHS I thought they were quite relevant, and were a polite way of asking for a declaratory opinion before having to go to court.

If it was myself, I would not of bothered with 11 points, just one would of been needed. I would of pointed them to the reply in Arkell v. Pressdram

aldestrawk says:

Re: Re: Re:

“Mozilla can in no way shape or form be held liable for an extension (especially when it is not even their extension but written by a third party)”

Is that true? Let’s suppose first that ICE actually exercised due process in obtaining the seizures through court order etc. If the code was a core part of Firefox, could ICE then get a court order to force Mozilla to remove a feature that helped in circumventing the domain seizure? Suppose it was an Apple approved app on an Ipad. That’s not much different than being a core feature of an Ipad. In Mozilla’s case they offer the add-on on their website as an officially approved one. Is this much different than the Ipad scenario? We all know that anyone can write and install an add-on for Firefox without Mozilla’s approval. The issue here is that Mozilla has put their seal of approval upon the Mafiaafire add-on. ICE is asking them to take that back and I assume they realize that won’t make Mafiaafire go away.
BTW: Mozilla did not approve the Firesheep add-on but that was not the result of government pressure.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re:

> it is clear that as a group located within the US it is generally
> not a good idea to get “cutesy” with the DHS and the DOJ.

The whole point of this country and the Bill of Rights is that the citizens are protected from reprisal by the government for being cutesy.

Indeed, the freedom to criticize the government and stand up to its abuses is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Your comment indicates how far we’ve fallen from those principles if you accept as a matter of course that citizens should just shut up and take it or else.

Anonymous Coward says:

I say we abolish DHS. Instead of protecting us from terrorists, they’re wasting their time (and our tax dollars) protecting big corporate profits and trying to protect the government from embarrassment (though in fact causing even more embarrassment in the process). Why do we need them again?

aldestrawk says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Rich is right, this is not Wikipedia, but I, being a pedantic sucker, will help you out. There is no trademark case that Mozilla has won against Toho.

“…But a person within Mozilla, who said he could not be quoted because of confidentiality agreements, said that the organization had already worked out a deal with Toho that allows it to keep using the name. Besides, he said, the Mozilla mascot is not Godzilla — just your garden-variety Tyrannosaurus rex.”



The word Mozilla came about as the internal name for the Netscape browser. Mozilla = Mosaic + killer. Mosaic being one of the first graphical browsers and developed at NCSA, Univ. of Illinois in 1992.

Anonymous Coward says:

I installed this extension when it first came out. Not because I need the extension but because with so much internet traffic being spied on, one of the things reported to websites are what extensions you have installed.

I want it seen that not every user of the internet in the US agrees with the actions ICE has taken.

Call it a civil disobedience.

Lauriel (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Me too. Not because I really visit those sites much (although one of them I did), but because I really loved what the guy said about taking a stand against censorship. I’m fully behind him on that.

I’m so proud of Mozilla – this is the response I was hoping for, but not really expecting. The questions they posited were acute, pertinent, and showed a very in-depth understanding of the on-going situation.

I agree with what some others have said – Mozilla is already my default browser, but it’s definitely time to hit the ‘donate’ button.

James says:

Re: Re: 51st State

No not the 51st state and no not behind Puerto Rico. However, CANADA is one of the largest corporations of the US.

Canada?s Corporate registered number. 0000230098 CANADA DC SIC: 8880 American Depositary Receipt. Business Address Canadian Embassy 1746 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20036??

Anonymous Coward says:

DHS IS FULL OF IT! (And I don't mean Information Technology)

The seizure orders very specifically instruct VeriSign to change the DNS records in their database to ones that the government has control over. This extension doesn’t change those records at all, therefore it’s not circumventing the orders and DHS’s request is an act of attempted censorship, technological stupidity or both.

Shane C (profile) says:

cutesy with the DHS

It is not at all clear if Mozilla could be held legally liable for its extension, but it is clear that as a group located within the US it is generally not a good idea to get “cutesy” with the DHS and the DOJ.

Mike, et al.,

I think what the AC is referring to here is the likelihood that DHS is seriously wondering if they could get away with “seizing” mozilla.org/com now that Mozilla has publicly pushed back against DHS. Asking questions privately, even though they didn’t get a response, allows DHS to forget about it, and brush it under the rug. Making it public puts egg on DHS’s collective face, and makes Mozilla a bigger target.

Is it right? NO
Does it change the threat to Mozilla? YES

Granted, making it public MIGHT make it harder for DHS to retaliate against Mozilla. And then again, it might not. So far DHS hasn’t appeared to care about public opinion (or legal opinions for that matter) with this little game they are playing. Their egos might just feel they have to power to take down a major internet software company for allowing the circumvention of their highly questionable, yet still in their eyes “legal” seizures.

All in all, I wouldn’t be surprised if mafiaafire.com is seized in the next round. It would make DHS look petty, and it appears (from text on the MAFIAAFire site) that not only is MAFIAAFire taunting DHS into doing it, but it looks like they have a backup site ready to go as well. So that seizure would be moot. Nevertheless, DHS still might do it because again, everything they’ve done so far they believe to be legal.

Part of me really wants to see DHS “seize” mozilla.org/com. That would be a big enough site, with a big enough budget to get this thing finished once and for all.

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: cutesy with the DHS

Seizing Mozilla.org would have a knock on effect the likes of which the US Govt could not imagine.

For example:
Mozilla would fight both in the courts, media, and halls of public opinion. Oh and this would seriously piss off a lot of very intelligent people worldwide

More than likely Mozilla would find another place of residence away from the USA with an interesting effect of a lot of other companies following suit and leaving the unstable legal waters of the USA

They could, and this would be highly interesting, un-license the usage of Mozilla products from any and all US Government usage. Oh and for all those who think it could not be unlicensed, you might want to actually read the copyleft/GPL license of Mozilla products.

The ripple effects of doing anything to Mozilla would be amazing, and yes like you I to would love to see the USG try.

chris says:

Re: Re: cutesy with the DHS

Knowing them they’ll probably accidentally confiscate .org instead 🙂

Seriously though, I remember reading that .org is managed outside of the US and is out of reach. Seal team mission?

I disagree about a strong backlash though. The numbers of people who care/would do anything other than bitch, just aren’t there. More likely they’ll just move, along with lots of other, like you said.

I love Mozilla!

Jay (profile) says:

Re: cutesy with the DHS

” Making it public puts egg on DHS’s collective face, and makes Mozilla a bigger target.”

Yes, but it’s collective egg.

You see, the FBI tried this, to no avail.

The White House threatened over their logo.

So seeing the government pushed back means there’s plenty more egg to go around.

Now I’m hungry for an omelette…

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: cutesy with the DHS

> Making it public puts egg on DHS’s collective
> face, and makes Mozilla a bigger target.

The idea that any citizen or business can so routinely be “targeted” by the government merely for standing up for themselves and exercising their legal rights is a sad indication of how fall we’ve fallen short of the country the Founders envisioned.

TheOldFart (profile) says:

I just added it to my browser

I have no use for the plugin. I’m against pirating of films, music and video games so it’s highly unlikely I’d ever visit most of those sites, but if there’s one thing I hate more than anything else in the world it’s a fascist.

The DHS is abusing its power in precisely the way it was intended to be abused when it was created, IMHO. It’s another step towards corporate owned law enforcement.

I rarely subscribe to any sort of conspiracy theory but is there *anything* the DHS has done to actually make the country safer? I’m not the only one asking that question either:



btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: I just added it to my browser

> Is there *anything* the DHS has done to actually
> make the country safer?

Depends on what you mean by “safer”.

The Coast Guard is part of DHS. They do a damn good job of both indicting drug and gun runners and search-and-rescue ops.

The Secret Service is part of DHS. They do a damn good job protecting high-level government officials.

On the other hand, DHS has done nothing to secure our borders (and actively undermines the efforts of anyone else who tries) and they oversee the ridiculous TSA and their grope-a-terrorist program. And their ludicrous fixation on copyright violation as a threat to national security is laughable.

So basically the question is too broad for just a simple yes/no answer. If DHS was abolished, as many here have called for, and the Secret Service disappeared, does anyone really believe the country would be better off for it, with our president left completely unprotected? No. Can they do a better job in other areas in setting the proper priorities and securing the country? Absolutely.

z (profile) says:

Re: Re: I just added it to my browser

Depends on what you mean by “a part of”…

“created in response to the September 11 attacks, and with the primary responsibilities of protecting the territory of the U.S. from terrorist attacks and responding to natural disasters.”

The Secret Service and Coast Guard were around a lot longer than DHS.

I still fail to understand how seizing domains protect us from terrorist attacks…

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: I just added it to my browser

> “created in response to the September 11 attacks, and with
> the primary responsibilities of protecting the territory of the
> U.S. from terrorist attacks and responding to natural disasters.”

Yes, and part of creating DHS was to consolidate already-existing agencies under one department.

> The Secret Service and Coast Guard were around a lot longer than DHS.

Sure. Doesn’t change the fact that they make up a significant percentage of DHS.

The point is, DHS does some things very well and other things so poorly you wonder if a team of clowns wouldn’t be better able to pull it off.

Gordon (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 I just added it to my browser

I believe you’re getting the point that others are putting out there but on this one thing, you’re wrong.

The Coast Guard and the Secret Service, although part of DHS, would not in any way be dissolved if DHS was torn down.
They would simply fall back to where they came from, or not. They could just exist.
DHS should have never been implemented anyway.

My 2 cents.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 I just added it to my browser

> The Coast Guard and the Secret Service, although part of DHS,
> would not in any way be dissolved if DHS was torn down.
> They would simply fall back to where they came from, or not. They
> could just exist.

The same could just as accurately be said for TSA and ICE and all the other DHS components that are causing the problems.

Eponymous CowTurd says:

But ... ... But ... ... But they're terrorists!

These guys are terrorists, that’s exactly why we pay them millions to protect us.

Yay Department of Home Land Security!

Now I’m confused, …..what are we secure from exactly?
Oh that’s right the terrorists!

Yay go on git that Osama babe.
Oh wait, thats not in your charter of operations is it?

Sounds like a FOX hunt then?
Better git those legal DOGS to go BARKING accusations then.

Nah, we don’t need that silly, just make a lot of noise like a stun grenade WHAM BAM Thank you MAME.

Now I feel totally SCREWED!

Its a sad day when the Department of Homeland Security makes the terrorists look GOOD HUH?

Anonymous Coward says:


Mafiaafire appears to be unlisted. Browsing through the list of extensions reveals no such program, and searching for it also yields no results. Did Mozilla cave in to DHS demands despite their initial refusal, or was the software never listed in the first place?

Unlawful domain seizures. Thuggish takedown demands. DHS has too much power and too little oversight.

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: Unlisted

The reason why it is not available in the publicly listed and searchable add-ons is that like a wide array of other add-ons it has not yet been reviewed by a Mozilla add-on editor [info about reviews here]

Though it can be seen it has been submitted awaiting review by using this mozilla link [ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mafiaafire-redirector/ ]

Mozilla has not caved in, in fact most likely this add-on will be reviewed post haste now and will most likely be in the top add-ons list very soon.

PrometheeFeu (profile) says:

Re: Poor Mozilla...

I really want them to. Boy will they have bitten more than they can chew if they seize the Mozilla domain. That would mean that nobody is safe from ICE seizures. Under such circumstances, just about the entire tech industry would be willing to go to the mat for Mozilla because they know they might be next. Ideally, they would seize Google. If they do that they will piss off enough basic computer users that we very well might see the head of the DHS resign.

Skeptical Cynic (profile) says:

State of the Union

Today we look at the State of our Union…

The TSA gropes kids for fun and profit.

The DHS somehow thinks that taking down domains is protecting the “Homeland”.

I.C.E refuses to actually stop illegal immigration, but thinks that it should be “Enforcing” it’s restrictions on people that are born or live here legally.

The DOJ is spending all of it’s resources on piracy, but does nothing about the problems caused by the financial crisis.

And during all of this the President of this great country ignoring all of the turmoil all over the world thinks it a great idea to film an episode of Oprah.

The State of the Union is STRONG!

Suzie Student says:

Fight back, America!

I’m sorry, but DHS is a complete joke as far as protecting US citizens goes. These mutated power-hungry monster structures we call our government and the current Federal Reserve need to come tumbling down. I have friends who see this ineptness and corruption when they go to work every day, so why haven’t we rebelled already? My admittedly biased (and perhaps flawed) opinion: Too many sheep, and not enough people are ready, willing, able or perhaps educated enough to speak out against stuff like this.

I really hope Mozilla wins this battle. Otherwise, I wonder what this country will become… a fascist authoritarian dictatorship or will be become just like (insert your favorite communist or former communist government), highly industrious as a nation but treats their people terribly and tries to cover it up as if they did nothing wrong or that nothing happened? If history has taught me anything, it’s that there will be a revolution. I hope it comes very soon. I also hope those DHS jackasses defecate their pants when they see how many people they’ve disenfranchised and infuriated if they keep acting like imbeciles.

I will be donating! Keep up the good fight, Mozilla!

Anonymous Coward says:

#1 terror organization is the USA government

The USA government is the largest terrorist organization in the world. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. How many examples do I need to make – holding people in Guantanamo that have been proven to be innocent (kidnapping/forcible confinement), murdering people like Bin Laden (never been proven guilty of anything), manipulation of governments, bribery, assassinations, the list goes on and on. Wake up America and smell the shit your government is feeding you.

Michael Whitetail says:

Re: #1 terror organization is the USA government

Wow. Way to be ignorant there. Do you have any citations to back up a single claim you’ve made?

(Preface: I do not believe in Gitmo, what its being used for, or the things that happen there)

Who in Gitmo has had legitimate proof of being innocent? Where is the proof?

On the Bin Laden deal, whether you believe he had anything to do with 9/11 is besides the point. We know what crimes he commited from The beginning of the Russian/Afgan war through to the 1996 bombing of the parking Gargage of the WTC.

How do we know? We *financed* his jihad all troughtout that war because, as far as the US was concerned, it was okay when he was doing that shit to the russians.

Now that they are doing it to us, we are all outraged!!

What assassinations? Citations please. There has been a Presidential Finding since Carter that forbids US forces to assinate anyone. Killed while attempting to flee capture is covered under the Internation rules of Land Warfare and is not assassination.

As for the Bribery and manipulations of other governments, can you honestly say that you think the US is the only one doing these things? Its called diplomacy and governments for the last 2,000+ years have been doing it.

I think it is you that needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Yes things are hideously wrong in this country, but needless, incorrect hyperbole is not requuired, and only tends to confuse the legitimate issues.

Michael Whitetail says:

Re: Re: Re: #1 terror organization is the USA government

Such are the rules of warfare, which grew out of the use of such barbaric things as gas, chemical, germ, and nuclear warfare during the first and second parts of the Great European Civil War (WWI and WWII for those who dont get the reference)

These are the rules that many, MANY civilized countries agreed on in trying to make war less horrible for all parties involved by laying down the rule of law on who is, or is not a fair target and how and with what they may be attacked.

It covers such things as care and supply of POW’s, while out-lawing such things as gas warfare, or the use of .50 cal weapons on human targets. It mandates acceptable use-of-force, tactics, and actions agaisnt enemy combatants, commanders, and spies/sabatuers. Especially those not dressed in national uniform. (This is where you get your streetside executions of VC prisioners who conducted illegal warfare while dressed as civilians)

As a commander in the field, soldiers had every right to return fire agaisnt those in the compound, and whether Bin Laden was carrying a weapon or not, as the self proclaimed commander of those forces, he was fair game.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 #1 terror organization is the USA government

It covers such things as care and supply of POW’s, while out-lawing such things as gas warfare, or the use of .50 cal weapons on human targets.

Actually that’s a myth, the Geneva Conventions (nor other treaties as far as I know) don’t prohibit the use of .50 caliber rounds against personnel. This seems like a pretty detailed exploration of the subject but I will leave you to google around about it if you’re interested.


Michael Whitetail says:

Re: government abuse of power by obummer etal

So its okay to Impeach and execute Obama for the things hes done, but it’s not okay to do the same to Bush?

Bush and his policies in his 8 year reign of destruction has destroyed more lives, financial futures, and killed more people *in this country* than anything Obama has done anywhere in the world!

He initiated 2 wars of aggression that were almost certainally illegal, lied about them and why. Changed the interstate banking laws to enrich his rich friends and supporters which spiralled the US into a Depression… THEN LIED THAT IT WAS EVEN A DPRESSION! His orders have resulted in an estimated 100,000 civilian deaths, and something like 5,000 us service men dead, with tens of thousands wounded.

Whats Obama done? Dicked us around with Online censorship in the name of corporate greed, and lied to us about transparency in the Government…. Seems just a bit different when you really look at the face of it.

Now I am not saying Obama has done thing wrong, far from it, but if what he has merits death, then what Bsh has done merits his death 1000 fold, and maybe even that of his family for the next 10 generations.

the0wl (profile) says:

Mozilla vs US ICE

Isn’t it absolutely wonderful when an entity like Mozilla says “no” to the US government? I grabbed MafiaaFire as soon as it came out for Firefox. I love it, and I love Mozilla. I also just installed MafiaaFire in my Chrome browser as well. Seems as tho Google feels the same way. See? We’re not *all* stuck behind a malicious firewall…


Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...