It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Approximately 84,000 websites were shut down and wrongfully accused of having links to child pornography as part of "Operation Protect Our Children," a new joint operation between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ).
The domain name mooo.com, which belongs to the DNS provider FreeDNS, hosted 84,000 subdomains, all of which were seized and replaced with a Homeland Security Investigations banner
Yes especially since they only had ten warrants.
Originally posted by youdidntseeme
it is pretty sloppy work to not notice that 84,000 sites were seized that had no business being seized.
Originally posted by youdidntseeme
You wont hear me saying that the government is overstepping the line here, especially because the specific sites that were targetted were accused of dissemination of child pornography.
Originally posted by bozzchem
Originally posted by youdidntseeme
You wont hear me saying that the government is overstepping the line here, especially because the specific sites that were targetted were accused of dissemination of child pornography.
Your response is precisely what the government expects. Allege reports of child porn and it's OK for them to do whatever the hell they want.
I don't condone child porn but find it interesting how such an allegation makes it OK for government to run roughshod.
I don't object for the 10 websites that actually had warrants, but I do object to the 84,000 websites they didn't have warrants for, posted a notice on their site saying it was seized for child porn, sort of falsely accusing the 84000 sites of something they didn't do, and then they don't get their websites back for 3 days while this nasty child porn banner shows up to visitors.
Originally posted by WhateverHappens
Child porn, why object to anything about the prosecusion, if you object, why?
Originally posted by Jim Scott
I still wonder if the Supreme Court ever decided what constitutes "pornography." Seems like the adult entertainment industry can do anything they want.