I found this on Rense dot com:
By Yoichi Shimatsu
Exclusive to Rense.com
1-15-12
Let us start by dismissing the prosecution’s ludicrous charge that any programmer as talented as Aaron Swartz would dedicate his life to stealing an archive that dispenses its academic papers for a few dollars apiece to the public or for free to students under department accounts. MIT professors, who are so full of themselves, are the only ones who might take seriously such a fool’s errand as a worthy objective for the brilliant and rebellious Swartz or the law suit as the cause of his so-called “suicidal depression.”
The mass media have been fed, and eagerly swallowed, the unpalatable lies hurled against a courageous young man whose guilt lies solely in his disgust at the online filth from “respectable” Internet paragons who have deviously corrupted the morals of his generation. America’s leading center for computer science has unleashed a campaign of slander against Swartz, who cannot defend himself through the media or in the docket now that he is dead.
My personal regret is that he had to act alone without the guidance and support of those faraway people including myself who have been fighting against the same vile pedophile elite. In American society where tens of thousands of children disappear every year without any serious investigation or public concern, the young man assumed the burden of justice on his own and paid the ultimate price for it. Using the JSTOR issue as a mere cover for his covert investigation into MIT wrongdoing was an immature tactic, which now undercuts his reputation postmortem.
As a traditional journalist and editor, I have never before supported Anonymous and their hacking activity, but the untimely death of Swartz changes the rules of engagement. Striking at the nerve center of the military-corporate-pharmaco-porno complex is an ethical duty not a crime, one of few available means to defend constitutional law. To the morally reprobate professors and administrators at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, I say unequivocally: You have started a war that will end when you fall on your swords.
The Culprit is MIT not Swartz
No, it is not Aaron Swartz who should be on trial but that lofty institution of hired learning, MIT, which is responsible for the heinous crimes that led to his death. The risks taken on by Swartz, which so have threatened MIT, can be understood only through the issue of child porn as orchestrated and produced by its acclaimed professors and distributed to their wealthy and powerful sponsors. The MIT cyber-pimps cater to a clientele that includes the highest echelon of the State Department, major corporations, intelligence agencies, the military brass, and the White House.
Every element in the Swartz case indicates that he died in a heroic attempt to expose the perversion that has corrupted the hearts and minds of the global elite, a heinous and often murderous vice that traumatizes innocent children and threatens every family on this planet.
This exposition of the facts is a torturous path that leads from the hallowed ivy halls in Boston to the outskirts of Phnom Penh, where a world-famous professor arranged underage sexual services for visiting dignitaries and sent encrypted child porn via satellite to illicit databases on the MIT campus.
Nicholas Negroponte, you have no place to hide in Southeast Asia or Africa, not any longer. You are under watch and will be relentlessly tracked down, not just for child porn and pimping children but now as an accomplice to murder. Your only way out is to turn over the video files along with the entire list of names, and you had better do it sooner than later because the powerful pedophiles on that list are going to silence you to cover their own tracks.
A Telltale Security Tape
The security video that triggered hacker Aaron Swartz’s indictment, to the contrary, exposes the criminal activities of his adversaries at MIT in the events that led to his death by hanging.
Some highlights from that video clip include:
- his slim physique, a waist size of no more than 30 inches, a short length that makes it practically impossible to hang himself with a belt, as reported by the Brooklyn police.
- a bicycle helmet held up to cover his face, meaning Swartz was cognizant of the surveillance camera inside the computer-routing and wiring closet on the MIT campus. On an earlier entry into the closet he was videotaped without the helmet and must have noticed the hidden camera at that time.
- the steel rack stacked with routers and at least one server into which he had plugged a laptop for a download, which required an extraordinary amount of time, indicating that the content was high-quality video and not documents.
- his trespass was a physical “break in” or walk in, which indicates the targeted server could be accessed only via a dedicated line and not with a hack. A dedicated line indicates the transfer of illegal content to strong encryption.
MIT Has No Proprietary Right to JSTOR
The videotape of Swartz’s download led to the MIT complaint that spurred a federal prosecutor in Boston to indict him for pirating online journals distributed by JSTOR, a subscription-based electronic archive of scholarly papers. The charges are patently absurd.
Why would a so-called notorious hacker bother with redistributing journal articles that can be purchased at nominal cost or gained for free by students with a department account?
Unlike the Wikileaks trove of diplomatic cables, none of the papers are classified or contain state secrets.
Why didn’t he simply hack into the main JSTOR archive, whose files are accessible in bulk online from dozens of universities?
Swartz was a research fellow with the Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard, which also has an institutional account with JSTOR. Given his street cred and past associations, he could have easily found a webmaster with the password to the JSTOR server.
How can MIT, which is not the owner of the allegedly accessed material, file theft charges against him?
The JSTOR archive is not owned or based at MIT, as media reports suggest, but is registered at the Network Connections server farm in Herndon, Maryland. JSTOR is under the control of a nonprofit organization called ITHAKA, whose board of directors includes top university administrators and the W.W. Norton book publisher. The trespass (into a tiny closet) was done at MIT, but ITHAKA, the party with proprietary rights over the JSTOR intellectual property, does not appear as the chief plaintiff. (Analogy: Whenever a car is stolen from a parking lot, the car owner and not the car hop is supposed to file charges against the thief.)
MIT obviously has something to hide.
When Internet Vigilantism Becomes Necessary
The mass media attributes the alleged “suicide” by short belt to “depression” without conducting any investigation into why Swartz might have been depressed. Article after article also describes him as a “co-founder of reddit”, as if he was one of the principle partners who owned the bulletin board, which was later sold to Conde Nast and operated by its subsidiary Wired magazine. His employee stock option in the company is a normal practice in the tech start-up field.
Swartz complained about relocating to the San Francisco offices of Wired for a routine job that he dreaded. There was obviously more to his bleak mood at the corporate-run reddit. Since he was not estranged from his parents and had an intelligent and attractive girlfriend, his foul mood seems to have arisen from professional concerns.
What would a decent family-oriented youth find so disturbing about working at corporate-controlled reddit? The bulletin board had gained profitable notoriety for its sub-edit groups that promoted discussion and images on underage sex, snuff porn, violent rape of adolescent girls, incest and abusive language. The crudest reddit posts came from the Internet’s most disgusting troll, Violentacrez, who was later exposed as then 49-year-old Texas-based programmer Michael Brutsch, a former soldier with a wife and children.
Whenever a person of sound mind and intact morality tries to go against the child-porn rings that are hiding in plain sight on the Web, he or she learns hard lessons fast. The child-porn pimps are well-organized, highly maneuverable into new websites, massively funded and deeply connected to regulators and law enforcement. These demented monsters are capable of making vicious threats and meting out brutal revenge against their critics. Invariably, the child-porn providers get away to start up again. Only insignificant subscribers are ever arrested in FBI and police round-ups, indicating higher-up protection for the pedophile crime bosses.
....
Reply With Quote