[pp.int.general] PPi ask Anonymous to stop Payback

Wed Nov 24 16:35:56 CET 2010

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for making this point clear: it is not about US law, it's 
about your morality and your desire to get published somewhere, by 
trying to capitalize O:P's media momentum by showing yourselves as a 
respectable alternative.

You keep on jeopardizing this issue. Not blaming doesn't mean blessing.

BTW, have you thought that you just get them angry with you whilst they 
would probably be part of your activists and voters? That is 
American-style? I thought it was kamikaze-style...

About European vs American style politics, that argument is quite 
offensive. People is rid of politicians, everywhere. Most Pirates belong 
to a Pirate Party because it is the easiest way to achieve law reforms 
in most countries, not because we want to be politicians, remember this.

May I ask you how big is PP-US? I just have facebook's fan figures: 
PiratPartiet has 36666 fans in a country with 11M people, Pirates de 
Catalunya has 5356 fans out of 7M people (we are just 4 months old), 
US-PP has 491 fans in a country with 280M people....

Looks like American-style politics doesn't work in the US anymore....

BTW, if a press release from Reuters is negative to GNU/Linux, are you 
gonna blame free software hackers? Do you agree with Chevron or Texaco 
when they blame environmental protesters because they throw paint in 
demonstrations? Oh yes, those dangerous hippies, we must kill them in 
order to defend our freedom to pollute! What do you think about Wikileaks?

Void arguments are void, regardless of the place.

Regards,

Kenneth

Al 24/11/10 15:49, En/na Andrew Norton ha escrit:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/23/2010 5:45 PM, Kenneth Peiruza wrote:
>    
>> This argument is bullshit.
>>
>> If PP-US is gonna loose the political party status because they don't
>> condemn a crime, they will be condemning crimes 24x7.
>>      
> Well, there aren't many groups that claim to share our principles, and
> 'prove' it by breaking the law on completely false and made up
> pretenses. When such actions are done that risk associating us, or our
> cause with criminals, marginalizing us and undermining our work, then
> YES, in fact HELL YES we should.
>
> If we were about attacking things, based on some crazy made up supposed
> wrong, we'd have joined one of the crazy redneck militias going on about
> how income Tax is unconstitutional, and how we need to 'put it to the
> man' (my father-in-law is just such a person - he's still living off t
> he stuff he stored in his bunker for y2k...)
>
> Instead we are gathered, as pirates, to effect change POLITICALLY. As
> such, we should maybe consider the facts, rather than jump up and down
> beating our chests and saying 'we should do this, we should be FEARED!'
> or other silly pseudo-macho stuff.
>
> The *FACT* is, I went to O:P's own media coverage listing
> (http://www.anonops.net/anonops/Media). On that list I found TWO
> mainstream media articles, the rest were tech blogs/news sites. The tech
> news sites, they cover this topic a lot in general, their readers tend
> to ALREADY know about it. You can't make people aware of stuff they
> already know. You can turn them off by your methods though. However, the
> mainstream news can spread the message, and in this case, it was two of
> the English-speaking world's biggest news agencies; Reuters and the BBC.
> (there were two Guardian articles, but they focus entirely on the ACS
> email leak, and the privacy implications thereof, and even then, it's
> mentioned 'as a leak of personal information after it was attacked by 4chan'
>
> Let's look at the BBC piece. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11371315
> It's not exactly positive. A longtime BBC reader (such as myself, the
> general public, or an MP) would potentially react negatively to this story.
> Then we look at the Reuters story, which is most DEFINITELY a news
> source read by the US Congress, and reprinted in countless newspapers
> across the world. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68J09F20100920
> I don't think O:P could get a more negative article if it tried.
>
> So Gee, wonder why we'd want, or need, to distance ourselves from their
> actions. It's called POLITICS, it's one of the things POLITICAL PARTIES
> *DO*. And just as US-style politics doesn't work in Spain, or Italy, or
> wherever (so I don't go telling you how to run your political campaigns
> and party), why do you (collectively) think that European-style politics
> works in the US? It doesn't even work in the UK. We know our countries,
> how they work, and what works politically.
>
> Our functions, as Pirate Parties, are to affect change in a number of
> areas, via the political process - either directly though being elected,
> or through influence with other political parties. Not to support every
> group, anarchist, or black-bloc protest, that claims to have the same
> aims just because they claim it, when their results are clearly against
> us. In the US, the actions of O:P did not support us, but hindered us.
> In spain it might have helped Pirata, I don't know, and to be honest,
> that's not my immediate focus or concern. And so what if DDoS' are legal
> some places, they are NOT in the US, and that's the area the USPP is
> concerned with. If something has only got to be legal somewhere else in
> the world to be ok, then who's going to be first to start on the female
> genital mutilations?
>
> and BTW, as has been said many times, PPI was not involved, two parties
> and two ONLY signed the letter. The only people who keep bringing up PPI
> and involving them are those trying to cause trouble (Or O:P members,
> and as we've already established, O:P is not so good with the facts).
> Agent provocateurs, perhaps, trying to sow discord between the parties,
> or those desperately trying to turn things away from the facts. Do you
> want to know how NOT involved the PPI is? the USPP isn't even a member
> of PPI.
>
> I did a longer breakdown of why O:P doesn't work (at least in the US)
> here http://t.co/DBclIXI Maybe it'll help explain things a little better
> than I can in email.
>
> - -- 
> Andrew Norton
> http://ktetch.blogspot.com
> Tel: (352)6-KTETCH [352-658-3824]
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM7SX6AAoJECjjuYTW3X5HrXAIAJz1FV/8LjyRS6IvLKNS5UKD
> o+Ij/F1UzOf/E2q2Re/VgTHpqdAxMpPjiAr/PMTdpMOybc8+JI3GvL9uuZ4WBEtT
> HDjDAQqoKIfXDvBpqwmsEKaC7NJfr6RlU6Fyz5hKiFXQwR3+xzfBCZUDqyJCjgUP
> nwu5fngXgSq1lmwF+wPapllvTK/3ltv4wA5tmUv9O856yCvRRe0KezQtLW7xTBcK
> wl94PxyoZWL6wR8NqIXs0smctyO5cDRJteLo/toICykI3AAMfPmDPzhtkofnun+p
> z4vuRWLm6A6KYED47onWQbzWLjy7tULbjSAIQiU4Vziwg+pJOENA5lNYibLE4ao=
> =UoU0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>    