Indymedia Website
Seizures Remain Shrouded In Questions
By Brendan Coyne
18 October, 2004
The
New Standard
A
week after the FBI disrupted about twenty websites operated
by local chapters of the Indymedia network, there is still no clear
explanation as to why agents seized some of the radical news organizations
servers. Yesterday, agents returned both of the confiscated computer
hard drives used to house the affected sites to Rackspace, the US-based
web hosting company that owns them. But Indymedia and supporters say
the return of the equipment raises more questions than it answers.
Last Thursday, agents from the US Federal Bureau of Investigation seized
the two hard drives from Rackspaces London offices. Rackspace
said had they complied with a subpoena and turned over the devices,
used by some Indymedia websites in Europe, the United States, Africa
and South America. According to initial news reports, the subpoena was
exercised by the FBI in cooperation with the governments of Switzerland,
the United Kingdom and Italy.
Last weeks action against Indymedia, a grassroots, non-hierarchical
global media network, effectively shut down sites operated from four
continents. As of press time, most of the sites are back up and running,
though six -- including one in Western Massachusetts -- remain inactive.
Indymedia spokesperson, David Meieran, said many of the sites were running
within the first 24 hours as mirrors and temporary replacement servers
were arranged by Indymedia centers throughout the world.
Now that the hard drives have been returned, Meieran said, Indymedia
and those committed to free speech need to keep pushing to find out
why they were seized and gaurd against a recurrence.
Due to questions about the returned drives integrity, Indymedia
is considering them "compromised" and not currently using
them, said Meieran. He said it is unlikely that the drives will be used
until the reasons for the seizure and the extent of the investigation
are determined.
For its part, the FBI has denied having any connection to the seizure
outside of assisting in the initial subpoena execution. FBI spokesperson
Joe Parris told Agence France-Presse that the request to seize the drives
came from a "third party." The FBI told The NewStandard that
Switzerland was the source of the request and directed further inquiries
to Geneva.
The Swiss government, however, has told European media outlets that
it did not request the servers. Swiss federal prosecutor Daniel Zapelli
did say, however, that they were investigating the Indymedia coverage
of last years G8 protest in Evian, though he declined to offer
specifics.
According to Meieran, many Indymedia volunteers initially suspected
the Swiss government had pushed for last Thursdays seizure after
Indymedia rebuffed a month-old request, delivered by the FBI, for the
removal of pictures showing undercover Swiss police officers photographing
protesters. But Meieran cautioned that all the theories are just speculation
at this point.
Now that the hard drives have been returned, Meieran said, Indymedia
and those committed to free speech need to keep pushing to find out
why they were seized and gaurd against a recurrence.
"Were putting together a call for consolidating the efforts
of the groups and people who support us," Meieran said. "We
are creating a website with a petition so we can find out why this happened
and if any international laws were broken.
"Also -- and this is far more important -- we want to make sure
this doesnt happen again," Meieran added.
Whatever the cause, many groups have stepped forward to condemn the
seizure and offer support to Indymedia. The American Civil Liberties
Union, Reporters Without Borders, the International Federation of Journalists,
the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Project Censored and Dutch and Belgian
journalism associations have all offered a variety of assistance.
In an official statement, the general secretary of the International
Federation of Journalists, Adrian White, said: "We have witnessed
an intolerable and intrusive international police action against a network
specializing in independent journalism. The way this has been done smacks
more of intimidation of legitimate journalistic inquiry than crime-busting.
The seizing of computers and the high profile nature of this incident
suggests that someone wanted to stifle these independent voices in journalism.
We need a full investigation into why this action took place, who took
part and who authorized it."
Peter Phillips, director of the Sonoma University-based Project Censored,
said in a press statement: "This is an indication of the successfulness
of the Indymedia network. Freedom of information is a radical idea when
applied in a fair manner. Radical ideas will always be suppressed by
the transnational corporate elites whenever possible. We must act on
our right to freedom of information to keep it safe, and when repressed
find new channels and means to succeed."
Reporters Without Borders issued a similar call. According to a press
release from the journalists advocacy organization, letters seeking
an explanation for the action were sent to government officials in the
UK, US, Switzerland and Italy.
Lawyers with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital rights
advocacy group, have contacted both the FBI and officials with Rackspace
in an effort to assist Indymedia. As of press time, the group said neither
the FBI nor the company had addressed their inquiries.
Meieran says EFF lawyers are the only ones currently representing Indymedia
as a whole, though, he says, the UK Indymedia and associates in Europe
have retained separate counsel.
This is not the first instance of government interference with Indymedias
activities. Directly before the Republican National Convention in New
York City, four Indymedia administrators and their web hosting company
were questioned by the Secret Service in response to an anonymous post
on the New York City Indymedia website which carried the names of convention
delegates and the hotels in which they were staying
© 2004 The NewStandard. See
our reprint policy.