I am confused here

@laglen (19782)
United States
November 30, 2010 11:00am CST
If ICE can close down websites for piracy and theft of goods. Why pray tell could they not shut down wikileaks? If this was such an issue of National Security, why not shut it down? Why all the talk and no action?
1 person likes this
9 responses
@hofferp (4739)
• United States
30 Nov 10
I'm betting they'll go after the Wikileaks owner with "espionage". With that as the charge, they'll be able to work with the country he's hiding in to catch him and have him extradited to the U.S. Why they didn't do this after the first incident, who in the h*ll knows? This Administration is a lot of talk and no or little action... That's why I'm waiting for 2012...
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
Thank you for actually getting my point!
@jb78000 (15173)
30 Nov 10
that wasn't your point
@hofferp (4739)
• United States
30 Nov 10
Blue Rabbit, what did you think was Laglen's point?
• Canada
30 Nov 10
Did you not hear today how Palin wants to pursue the owner of this site? Espionage. The government has to pursue a legal avenue to shut the site down and also lay criminal charges against the owner of the site. I agree the site should be shut down, it should have been shut down after the last major leak, which was just as bad as this one. I'm sure if the owner of the site was up here, his site would have been shut down immediately.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
Palin has no power but Obama and Clinton do. They are the ones I am referring to. Clinton claiming this could cost lives, you would think they could get that warrant no problem.
• United States
30 Nov 10
A warrant would not do them any good. The serve is not in the US so they can not shut it down...even with a warrant. They can't go to another country with a US warrant and tell that country they have to shut it down because a US judge says so.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
ok, I get that, but it seems to me that with their "long arm of the law" they would have been able to do something
@jb78000 (15173)
30 Nov 10
because its main server is in sweden? don't think your ice has jurisdection over sweden.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
No but they do have the ability to block it.
• United States
30 Nov 10
How? And that would cause a HUGE backlash here in this country over censorship. China blocks stuff...the US doesn't.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
Our government is daily broadening their ability to censure
• United States
30 Nov 10
ICE can only shut down web sites located or served in the US. Wikileaks is not located or is the server in the US. So ICE can't touch it. Our government can't do anything about it. Sure they can after the guy who leaked the information to wikileaks. They are....that guy is in major trouble. But they can't do anything about Wikileaks or the guy who owns it. He is not a US citizen and he does not live in the US. So therefore he is not subject to our laws. The guy who gave the documents to wikileaks is a us citizen and does live in the US so therefore he is the one who is going to get into all the trouble over this.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
30 Nov 10
ok, I understand that now. but it seems to me that they would find a way if it was that important. Also this is an International incident.... Every country has their feet in the fire.
• United States
30 Nov 10
Yep this is an international incident. But the problem is Wikileaks has not broken any laws in the two countries it operates out of. So sure the world is pissed. But sense they have not broken any laws in the country the site operates out of and that the owner of it lives in...there is nothing anyone can do. I only see two options when it comes to them getting shut down 1. Wikileaks get careless and violated the laws of Belgium and Sweden and gets shut down. Which I don't see happening. They seem to be very careful about making sure they stay on the right side of the law in those countries. 2. Other countries put so much preasure on Belium and Sweden that they violate their own laws and shut them down. Which will cause a HUGE backlash for those two with their own populations. The government can not just choose to break the law and then expect their population to follow the law. The best you could see in this is those two countries change their laws...but I don't see them changing their freedom of the press laws to suit the rest of the world.
• United States
1 Dec 10
Simply put, being hosted in Sweden means WikiLeak's servers are beyond ICE's jurisdiction. Nor does crying "terrorism" to Interpol get one anywhere, there's a definition of terrorism and publishing things the US Government would rather not be published isn't a part of the definition. Nor is blocking the site much of an option -- the Internet is designed to provide access to the servers on it. That means it's designed -- has been designed as priority 1 since day 1 -- to provide ways around attempts to block access to a site.
@dark_joev (3043)
• United States
1 Dec 10
I am not so sure as my post above you points out if they are hosted in Sweden. They are hosted where Amazon their website host has them located which seems to me to be inside the United States the Ip-lookup even showed the server to be located within the United States so INTERPOL shouldn't be needed as you could just go around the website owners head and give Amazon.com the stop hosting it order and that should fix it for a while.
@dark_joev (3043)
• United States
1 Dec 10
Below is the whois info I found on this website. The Domain is at least registered in the United States but that could be that the Domain host at least has some operations that occur in the United States. Domain ID:D130035267-LROR Domain Name:WIKILEAKS.ORG Created On:04-Oct-2006 05:54:19 UTC Last Updated On:26-Aug-2010 22:38:42 UTC Expiration Date:04-Oct-2018 05:54:19 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:Dynadot, LLC (R1266-LROR) Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED Registrant ID:CP-13000 Registrant Name:John Shipton c/o Dynadot Privacy Registrant Street1:PO Box 701 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City:San Mateo Registrant State/Province:CA Registrant Postal Code:94401 Registrant Country:US Registrant Phone:+1.6505854708 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email:privacy@dynadot.com Admin ID:CP-13000 Admin Name:John Shipton c/o Dynadot Privacy Admin Street1:PO Box 701 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City:San Mateo Admin State/Province:CA Admin Postal Code:94401 Admin Country:US Admin Phone:+1.6505854708 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email:privacy@dynadot.com Tech ID:CP-13000 Tech Name:John Shipton c/o Dynadot Privacy Tech Street1:PO Box 701 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City:San Mateo Tech State/Province:CA Tech Postal Code:94401 Tech Country:US Tech Phone:+1.6505854708 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email:privacy@dynadot.com Name Server:NS1.EVERYDNS.NET Name Server:NS2.EVERYDNS.NET Name Server:NS3.EVERYDNS.NET Name Server:NS4.EVERYDNS.NET Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: DNSSEC:Unsigned The name servers unfortunately point to a DNS pointing service that could be pointing the domain to another country. I did some more searching and found this to be the website host for http://aws.amazon.com/ wikileaks I don't think their servers are in another country. It just doesn't seem to be the likely location for a website company that was founded in the United States to have servers outside the United States that they sell website hosting on. So it looks like at least as far as where the data is actually being stored it would look to me that it is inside the United States which means it should be easy for them to stop the dissemination of this information. http://ec2-184-72-37-90.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/ The link above should take you to wikileaks.com also. Just thought I would share what I found by doing my own research into the matter hope it helps further your great discussion :) Oh the other two sites I used to find this info where. http://www.whois.net -which refereed me to the one below http://www.pir.org/get/whois?domain=wikileaks&Submit=Search http://ip-lookup.net/?184.72.37.90
@dark_joev (3043)
• United States
1 Dec 10
Sorry I re read this found it to be a little confusing their website host is Amazon.com so I am fairly positive the site is hosted inside the United States as an IP lookup found the server that housed Wikileaks to be on a US Ip address. For its location.
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
30 Nov 10
You are confused why ICE can close down websites..I am also confused as to what ICE is doing investigating counterfeiting and piracy? According to the ICE web page the mission of ICE is: "ICE's primary mission is to promote homeland security and public safety through the criminal and civil enforcement of federal laws governing border control, customs, trade, and immigration. The agency has an annual budget of more than $5.7 billion dollars, primarily devoted to its two principal operating components - Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO)." http://www.ice.gov/about/overview/ But the Director of ICE sees things differently: "The sale of counterfeit U.S. brands on the Internet steals the creative work of others, costs our economy jobs and revenue and can threaten the health and safety of American consumers," said ICE Director John Morton. "The protection of intellectual property is a top priority for Homeland Security Investigations and the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center. We are dedicated to protecting the jobs, the income and the tax revenue that disappear when counterfeit goods are trafficked." http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1011/101129washington.htm The US Citizens want ICE to protect them from illegal immigrants while the Motion Picture Association of America and the Record Industry considers stopping the sale of pirated movies and music to be their number one priority. It seems to me that ICE is doing with the movie stars and singers want rather than what their mission is and what the American people want.
@spalladino (17925)
• United States
1 Dec 10
Did you miss the words "customs" and "trade" on the ICE website? Are they only capable of doing one thing at a time?
1 person likes this
• United States
24 Dec 10
they're working on it.i think they had a problem because of the "net neutrality" issue.but if it gets on a foreign server,all they can really do is complain to the host country and or block it.
@skysuccess (8882)
• Singapore
1 Dec 10
laglen, Again, I am equally baffled as you why NATO(No Action Talk Only) here. The site is really making your country's Homeland Security and whatever law enforcement agencies a laughing stock. I mean, have you considered how in the world people in the Pentagon are leaking loads of confidential documents? This is worse than the Oliver North episode, where I believe this site to be somewhat responsible for the fatalities in the middle east.