Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d

chrisd posted more than 11 years ago | from the he-who-controls-the-spice dept.

Security 1346

gobbo writes "The buzz amongst my Muslim acquaintances is that the al-Jazeera site is under "cyber-attack." Shortly after posting photos of mangled Iraqi children the server became unavailable. I don't have satellite TV to see if they are reporting anything on al-Jazeera itself, but pinging their name servers fails too. For those who don't already know, the al-Jazeera channel is a pan-Arabic satellite TV channel out of Qatar." While I am certain many h4x0rs are political, I can't help thinking that script kiddies are like moths to the flame of rising page views. (this was initially posted incorrectly, and has been moved to the proper date)

cancel ×

1346 comments

First Post?!? (2, Informative)

Deven (13090) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601159)

How is it that any story on Slashdot can survive without any comments at all for nearly 24 hours? Is the system broken? This is unusual!

Re:First Post?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601185)

Second post. Truly weird.

Re:First Post?!? (1)

Suppafly (179830) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601187)

because /. doesn't really work that well and some stories don't actually show up until they are in the old news side bar.

Re:First Post?!? (3, Informative)

chrisd (1457) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601810)

I screwed up with the initial date, so sorry about that.

Re:First Post?!? (1)

BJH (11355) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601832)

Not to mention the category... exactly what was the question? ;)

Re:First Post?!? (1)

chrisd (1457) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601873)

Can a slashdot editor screw more things up than ever before?

Answer....

chrisd

PS: Also, I hope people don't get modded down for noting the date, I mean, that was my screwup after all....even if -now- it's off topic.

Re:First Post?!? (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601926)

Can a slashdot editor screw more things up than ever before?

Yes, when the correction has a typo "ans has been..."

Re:First Post?!? (2, Funny)

Farmer Jimbo (515393) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601937)

Boy oh boy. If I had mod points, I'd exact some serious retribution for some complicated and sarcastic reason involving the moderation system.

Mangled children? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601941)

Ok, here are some mangled grown ups:

http://cryptome.org/us-blackout/us-blackout.htm

Can we stop the war now, please?

How did this one sneak in? FP =P (-1, Offtopic)

ksuMacGyver (562019) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601175)

Anyway more OT: Bet it is very tempting to go after this site, after all it is not like the US government is going to prosecute you for it.

Re:How did this one sneak in? FP =P (1)

oh (68589) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601402)

According to this article [msnbc.com] on MSNBC the US government is considering purchasing advertising time on Al Jazeera in order to get their message to "Arab Street".

I went looking at the mail Al Jazeera web page looking for english information a few weeks ago( I don't speak any other language>, but I didn't see any link to this site. I don't know if its new, or they just don't link there from their Arabic language pages.

I can't find a google cache of it anyway, I hope it comes back up soon.

use P2P (2, Informative)

vladkrupin (44145) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601512)

you can find it here [aljazeera.net] . It's been hacked, but should come up shortly I bet. However, their controversial footage which is probably what you are looking for, is not available there. It's not available anywhere else due to heavy censorship, so you may have to check your favorite P2P network. Searching for 'jazeera' brings up some interesting results.

BTW, we've all heard claims that P2P networks are only used to steal music, movies, etc. This is about the first good example of P2P being used for a valid cause - to share news and avoid censorship. (aren't we supporting freedom of speech after all?)

Re:use P2P (2, Insightful)

Fat Casper (260409) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601892)

(aren't we supporting freedom of speech after all?)

No. Excercising the rights that generations have fought and died to protect is unpatriotic. John Ashcroft says so.

WTF ??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601192)


second post ...

YOU FAIL IT (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601996)

Dear WTF,

You failed it.

Sincerely,
Slashdot.

That'll teach 'em (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601197)

It's probably the kids of the suits who kicked Al jazeera outta the NYSE.

3rd Postith (1)

mikeclark (635807) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601310)

Yeah it is really odd there are so few posts

Military targets? (5, Interesting)

twemperor (626154) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601325)

I think this raises some new interesting questions.

For example, the US military claimed that Iraqi TV, as it was providing information and instruction to Iraqi troops, was a legitimate military command and control target. Would similar online media outlets be similarly classified?

More importantly, would hackers, even script kiddies, be considered combatants if they attack such a military target in a time of war?

I don't think this has any practical implications, just philosophical...

Re:Military targets? (0, Flamebait)

Acidic_Diarrhea (641390) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601397)

You are suggesting that Iraq should start bombing the alcove above Mrs. Johnson's garage to smoke little Billy out?

Re:Military targets? (1)

twemperor (626154) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601656)

Of course not. However, what would be an appropriate response for the US when an Iraqi or Al-Queda "civilian" releases a virus or DOS attack against military targets? Besides of course, switching to Linux. =)

Just trying to start some kind of discussion on this lifeless thread...

Re:Military targets? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601879)

Call the bnastard an illegal combatant and torture the fuck out of him! It worked before!

Re:Military targets? (5, Insightful)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602019)

Would similar online media outlets be similarly classified?

It's not a "similar" outlet. Unless you mean to bomb any foreign media that don't toe Rumsfeld's line. In spite of David Letterman sketches, al-Jazeera is neither Afghani or Iraqi, but is based in Qatar.

See this article [msnbc.com] on its origins.

Today, al-Jazeera is staffed by many of the same [BBC] journalists I saw weeping in London that day, including Azar. It is the lone Arabic broadcast outlet to put truth and objectivity above even its survival. For its pains during the five years of its existence, it has been attacked by virtually every government in the Middle East.
They've also got a new English service [aljazeera.net] . (Which was heavily overloaded even before this, so you'll have a hard time seeing it.)

Unfortunate timing... (1)

Q-tip (122594) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601329)

Yesterday I found out that there is a english [aljazeera.net] version of the site, but there was no response when i tried to load the page. That sucks... it would have been interesting to read news written from the other point of view.

Re:Unfortunate timing... (2, Interesting)

oh (68589) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601438)

Al Jazeera is not an Iraqi broadcaster, it is an Arab broadcaster. It would be interesting to see the coverage from the Iraqi news, but I don't know of any english language Iraqi news site.

Remember that Al Jazeera is independent, they don't just broadcast what the government wants to broadcast.

For some information from inside baghdad, try this blog. Of course, there is nothing to prove it is really from why they say they are, but there is no reason to believe it anyway.

Do you mean... (2, Informative)

tuxedo-steve (33545) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601882)

... this blog [blogspot.com] ?

Re:Unfortunate timing... (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601954)

Al Jazeera is independent of direct state control as they are in Qatar and not overly restricted. But they are not "independent" in the way most Americans think of it meaning, "trustworthy and truthfully"

Re:Unfortunate timing... (1)

XO (250276) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601957)

Which blog? You kinda forgot the link.. just kinda... d'oh :)

Re:Unfortunate timing... (1)

Whyaduck (140952) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602005)

C-SPAN [c-span.org] was running uncut Iraqi satellite broadcasts a day or two ago (late night). The audio track included a translation. I don't see it on their schedule for the next day or two, though.

What's the question asked to /.? (1)

Papineau (527159) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601348)

This is in the As Slashdot page, but there's no "?" in the post. Is it possible it's not in the correct section (should probably be on the front page)?

5145hd0t 0wn3d? (1)

npongratz (319266) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601384)

Seriously.

Item A: this is in an "Ask Slashdot" section.
Item B: there are only 10 comments as I write this.

There's definitely something wrong here...

Re:5145hd0t 0wn3d? (1)

Xaje (266591) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601425)

and the moderation pull-down menu only appears for one of the comments. something wrong indeed...

Weird (4, Insightful)

bleckywelcky (518520) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601404)


First time I've seen a story that doesn't appear on the main /. page but ends up surfacing in the Older Stuff side bar.

I do have to say that I am saddened to see this happen because although Al Jazeera may have been biased on the side of Iraq, it is good to have alternative news sources to get the other side's story from. And despite what many people may whole-heartedly claim, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NBC, etc all do have a sense of American bias in them. That's besides the fact that half of their reporting is so horrible, it is actually hard to watch sometimes. I've found myself turning off the TV numerous times in response to my disgust for some of the stuff they hack out as "news". Although, I have found the embedded reporter's reports quite interesting, and you can always catch the various briefings, latest field updates, and general news easily enough. But, these agencies spend way to much time on sensationalism, heart-string-picking, etc.

I hope Al Jazeera can get their site back up soon.

Re:Weird (2)

gnixdep (629913) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601441)

I don't know how biased they are towards Iraq. They are based in Qatar, and funded by that government. The Qatar government is allied with the United States here.

Re:Weird (5, Informative)

hazem (472289) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602020)

Al-Jazeera's pretty interesting. I've been watching it for about 3 years now. My Arabic isn't stellar, but I'm able to keep up with it pretty well.

Before the current war, it was a lot like a cross between CNN, with news & comentary, and Discovery, with documentaries.

It has an interesting history. As I understand it, the prince of Qatar funds it, but leaves it in the hands of the station to do all their own editorial control.

It definitely had an Arab point of view, but to me that makes sense. Looking at it from that point of view, I would almost say that it is fairly balanced. Just as an American would probably find CNN fairly balanced.

They don't hesitate to put Americans on (translated - unless you're former embassador Dennis Ross - he showed up on a debate show and handled it all in BEATUFIUL Arabic!). Rice and Powell have both been on there, but so has Saddam, and Tariq Aziz.

Is there an anti-American slant? Well, even though few Arabs like Saddam and his regime, very few are very keen on the idea of a superpower coming in and taking out an Arab regime. The whole region has an unpleasant history of colonialism and occupation, and for many, this just appears to be another chapter in it. A lot will depend on how we handle the post-Saddam iraq.

Another thing that is interesting... it's not a new thing that they're showing dead bodies and such. For as long as I've watched, they've not had a probelm with showing dead Palestinians or dead Israelis in that conflict. They don't talk over it either - sometimes just several minutes of showing what is going on or what has happened.

So, I've rambled on, not really answering your question, but I don't often get to talk about Al-Jazeera.

Re:Weird (1)

WildBeast (189336) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601874)

I like ABC and CBC, they are pretty good.

Re:Weird (1)

khb (266593) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601931)

al jeezra is but one venue for "opposing" views. For example: http://www2.arabnews.com and www.jordantimes.com/ just for starters.

Re:Weird (5, Insightful)

Kasperitus (316050) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601956)

There was an article in the Wall St Journal a few days ago discussing the bias of US reporters. They mentioned that many of the "embedded" journalists use the personal pronoun "we" all the time. They compared that with a clip from a British reporter who was careful enough to detach himself, referring to the soldiers using "they". "They are encountering resistance..." "They are approaching Baghdad..." etc. Its a noticable difference.

The article also mentioned that BBC seems to be doing a better job trying objective than US stations.

Re:Weird (1)

Kasperitus (316050) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601993)

doing a better job trying to be objective than US stations.

I knew I should have previewed!

Re:Weird (1)

mfifer (660491) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601971)

I hope Al Jazeera can get their site back up soon.

You forgot:

so they can continue providing a venue for Iraq to break (or bend seriously) the tenets of the Geneva Convention [asociety.com]

Oh joy, "The Attack of the Easily Led" (1)

Christopher Biggs (98469) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601423)

The problem I have with script kiddies making political attacks is the same as the problem with high-school students and university freshers filling out the bulk of the current political protest marches.

These people are immature, inexperienced and naive, and are just as easily led to a BAD cause as a good one. (I'm sure many of us old farts cringe when recalling some of the lame ideas we supported when we were young and impressionable.)

THINK, don't just follow the guy with the megaphone.

(I happen to be anti-war, but for anarchistic reasons; I wouldn't be seen dead marching with those socialist loonies who seem to think a protest march is a "gonna bash some pigs and loot me a new pair of shoes" event.)

Re:Oh joy, "The Attack of the Easily Led" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601857)

> I wouldn't be seen dead marching with those socialist loonies who seem to think a protest march is a "gonna bash some pigs and loot me a new pair of shoes" event.

Or the *sit in the intersection, claiming to care about people, ignoring ambulances, fire turcks, people trying to get to work* event.

Yes, San Franciscan and bitter, can't you tell?

They're turning people against their methods and, by extension, against their cause.

Re:Oh joy, "The Attack of the Easily Led" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601985)

(I happen to be anti-war, but for anarchistic reasons; I wouldn't be seen dead marching with those socialist loonies who seem to think a protest march is a "gonna bash some pigs and loot me a new pair of shoes" event.)

Funny, I always thought that attacking police and looting stores was more of an anarchistic thing to do.

Little orphan postie (1)

MrEd (60684) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601540)

Poor topic, never got a chance to be discussed... anyhow, my 2c:


It's funny to watch how righteous some authorities in the US are getting about Al-Jazeera. I mean, they describe it as a propaganda machine whose credibility is based on being an independant station... sounds like CNN, right? So now we have two CNNs dueling for the plaque-congested hearts and couch-deadened minds of the people! That's a danger that's new to the history of warfare, innit?

Re:Little orphan postie (2, Insightful)

WatertonMan (550706) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601968)

CNN has been fairly critical of the government. For instance they (along with many other outlets) have been criticizing them for a plan without enough ground troops, for allowing supply lines to be undefended, and so forth.

I'll criticize both CNN, FOX and NBC for not being clear enough at times distinguishing what is "confirmed" from what is an initial report. The pundits have been even worse. The "chemical weapons plan" from Sunday night was very embarrassing. So was the "uprising" in Basra. Of course to be fair, that was the BBC that the American media outlets then picked up. So it is hardly an American phenomena.

Further most of the outlets have had a very narrow view of things. Very few questions and, in general, superficial reporting. One of the generals working for CNN has been pretty good and I was quite impressed with the CNN interview with the New York Times reporter last night. But overall they've not done that great a job. Further they seemed *shocked* that there were casualties and that the war didn't end in a week.

I think the media could do much better, for sure. But I suspect that they will improve with time. One hopes anyway. But while they tend to have a pro-American bias, that's hardly surprsing given their audience. But I don't think it is necessarily a pro-Administration bias.

On the other hand all of the other networks have had their biases. As for Al Jazeera, the following was an interesting discussion on them.

CNN Money [cnn.com]

I can't speak for their bias, as I've not watched Al Jazeera. But clearly many have problems with them.

Re:Little orphan postie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601980)

So now we have two CNNs dueling for the plaque-congested hearts and couch-deadened minds of the people!

I don't think there are as many of these people as you think. Yes, many people watch too much tv. Yes, many people don't get enought excersise. Yes, many people are too lazy to stay well informed of the issues.

Please, just remember that you're no better than they are. Everyone hasn't had the same advantages that you've had. Try not to be so cynical.

Thanks :)

Re:Little orphan postie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601990)

More links: Unknown news [unknownnews.net] Dead guys [cryptome.org] Boycott [slashdot.org]

Not to be picky but... (2, Insightful)

/dev/trash (182850) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601586)

What was the question?

English Al-Jazeera (2, Interesting)

Drunken Coward (574991) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601595)

More pointedly, the DOS'ing of the Al-Jazeera web site coincides with the debut of its English counterpart [aljazeera.net] .

The truth will remain elusive.

Re:English Al-Jazeera (1)

gnuadam (612852) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601906)

I know...I've been waiting for this for a long time. I try to read as much as I can from a variety of viewpoints. There's not too much in the way of english language arab news. Well, there is the Arab News [arabnews.com] of saudi arabia. But al Jazeera seems to be quite popular and it would have been interesting to see what all the fuss is about.

It does make you wonder who the attackers are.

Submission Title Problem (2, Insightful)

frostman (302143) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601612)

Writing the headline in "|-|@X0R" speak or whatever is pretty stupid here.

This is a serious issue that should be generating lively debate here on /. - and the hackerspeak is probably the number one reason why no comments are floating up in moderation.

I rather doubt "script-kiddies" are involved in this, and as I write this the sites are even more down than they were yesterday (DNS lookups fail).

Regardless of what you think of this development, it's pretty obviously both "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters" - and styling it as "n00z 4 n33rD$" is a disservice to this forum.

(Yeah I know my hacker-writing is a bit rusty.)

Re:Submission Title Problem (1)

DavidBrown (177261) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601973)

I have to respond, just because of my sig, which is not new.

Perhaps 133t speak presents a problem moderation by increasing the pool of comments that cry out for negative moderation, but there's nothing official Slashdot can do about it other than create some sort of auto-censoring l33t filter.

And it's not as if entire front page postings are in 133t, either. It was just a headline, and a headline's only job is to draw your attention to the body alone. And it did, so it worked.

Also it made sense - granting the hax0rs their due if they were the ones who really brought down al-J. Of course, it could have been a DOD-DOS. This would not surprise me in the slightest.

Remeber it's just a show and you should really just relax.

L4$T P$0T! (1)

mekkab (133181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601622)

Yeah, this sucks- I was using washingtonpost.com, guardian.co.uk, and english.ajazeera.net to balance my view of the world. I figure 3 lies == 1 truth?! This suxx0rz.

And yes- what is up with slashdot?! But at least this story made it into the older stuff pile- for the past two days I've been constantly loading english.ajazeera.net and checking the google cache for the regular aljazeera.net- nope- its days old.

At least I'm not the only one...

all your jazeera are belong to us.

Re:L4$T P$0T! (2, Insightful)

federal_employee (550285) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601683)

I listen to "Democracy Now" off the web. They frequently reference the Guardian and Aljazeera. www.democracynow.org [democracynow.org] Watch out for the sappy-amateur-protest-folk- songs.

Re:L4$T P$0T! (1)

mekkab (133181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601741)

thanks for the tip! (and thanks for the caveat re: protest songs, too! ;)

More (4, Informative)

Trogre (513942) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601652)

More on this here [stuff.co.nz]

MOD PARENT UP!!! (1)

mekkab (133181) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601864)

Great link... That's INSANE! Their website hasn't just been hacked (I assumed they had just been slashdotted...) but their press had their credentials revoked from the N.Y. Stock Exchange- that's a petty low-blow.

Slashdot effect on a global scale? (5, Interesting)

alienmole (15522) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601665)

According to an Infoworld article [infoworld.com] , Al Jazeera had just published photos of the U.S. soldiers who were allegedly executed. In the U.S., these pictures have effectively been censored - the major media don't want to touch them. Mightn't Al-Jazeera simply be suffering from a large-scale Slashdot effect, as people around the world try to download photos?

While consulting, I've come across companies doing all sorts of dumb or just lazy things which make their sites slow and not very scalable. Then they get a big burst of unusual activity for whatever reason, their site crashes, and they like to claim conspiracy because it means it's not their fault.

I'll believe this is a DDOS when I see the IRC transcripts from the people claiming to be the perpetrators (if that's not proof, I don't know what is :) Till then, this is Al-Jazeera crying because their site couldn't handle sudden worldwide interest.

Re:Slashdot effect on a global scale? (5, Insightful)

EZCheese (235320) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601890)

I'll believe this is a DDOS when I see the IRC transcripts from the people claiming to be the perpetrators (if that's not proof, I don't know what is :) Till then, this is Al-Jazeera crying because their site couldn't handle sudden worldwide interest.

According to the article you cited, the DDOS attack is being directed at their name servers, and not the web server (which is why I'm not getting "unable to resolve host" messages). Name servers generally don't wither under high volume - this seems more like a deliberate attack than a large-scale Slashdot effect.

Re:Slashdot effect on a global scale? (1)

cyril3 (522783) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602023)

So if you know the ip address you should be able to get through, right. Well does anyone know the ip for any of their sites.

Re:Slashdot effect on a global scale? (1)

guacamolefoo (577448) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601933)

According to an Infoworld article [infoworld.com], Al Jazeera had just published photos of the U.S. soldiers who were allegedly executed. In the U.S., these pictures have effectively been censored - the major media don't want to touch them.

Maybe rotten.com will pick them up.

GF.

Re:Slashdot effect on a global scale? (1)

dacetone (177878) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602008)

ogrish.com [ogrish.com] has some (courtesy of al-jazeera).

Slow down Cowboy! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601839)

Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a story to allow every moderator a fair chance at posting a story. It's been 1 minute since you last successfully posted a comment

More info in Doktor Memory's journal (1)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601846)

More info, and a better written submission, can be found in Doktor Memory's journal [slashdot.org] .

Ah, how I wish that ./ had a k5-type article submission system.

Yes I know, don't complain, get off your ass and write it. I know, I know...

If it isn't really down... (1)

kaamos (647337) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601848)

... then the /.ed effect will take care of any standing server...

Look ma! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601850)

Maximum Comments Exceeded!

You've reached your maximum number of comments you can post: 381 comments over 4 hours.
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.

Holy bejeezus! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601872)

381!? That's unpossible! You're only allowed a comment every 2 minutes, so 30 an hour, or 120 over 4 hours. You've tripled that!!! Amazing. Of course, it's been -282 seconds since I last posted a comment, so anything is possible with Slashdot's new negative refraction server.

Suggestion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601897)

Has anyone considered setting up mirror sites? If we can set up mirrors for DeCSS, I don't see why we shouldn't be able to do the same for the content of this web site.

Surprised? (1)

inertia@yahoo.com (156602) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601902)

What would you expect? They were running ISS for crying out loud.

Re:Surprised? (1)

inertia@yahoo.com (156602) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601920)

Er, I mean IIS. Yeah, like you've never done that.

Freedom of the Press (5, Insightful)

ewe2 (47163) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601903)

I find the apathy on this site towards the possible gagging of a media organization disturbing. On a TV report [abc.net.au] this week, I learnt a lot about al-Jazzeera. Yes, they are pan-Arabic. Yes, they are critical of the US. They've also been threatened by every single Arab country in the region - closed down, ambassadors recalled, physical attacks. And it was bombed by the US in the first Gulf War when it reported the killing of civilians in a supposedly military target.

You can't have it both ways, even in a war. The Net is being used for some of the most blatant propaganda I've ever seen, but shutting down the Arab side of the argument isn't going avoid bigger problems later.

They don't know anything about a DDOS attack... (1)

mrpuffypants (444598) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601904)

until they get posted to the front page of /.

Score another one for the USA!

It's down because of the /. effect (1)

shodson (179450) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601912)

If you guys would stop posting stories about their website then maybe they'd stay up and running! :)

Script Kiddies? (1)

Apostata (390629) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601914)

Undoubtably, I'm sure there's some foul play from the "kiddies", but they sure as hell didn't "accidentally" bomb the Al Jazeera HQ during the Afghan conflict two years ago.

I tell you, folks, if *we* aren't going to look into the cause of this, no one else will. Angel or devil, Al Jazeera offers another viewpoint - and considering the frighteningly narrow perspectives we get in North America, we could use all we get right now.

Unfair... (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601916)

When slashdot post an article point to any site and effectively denies anyone to access it, by a massive slashdot effect, nobody talks about it, even you can be modded down if you suggest that... but when some amateurish script kiddies do the same they deserve the front page? That's unfair.

Anyway, considering the very few unbiased news on the war available, DOSing the one that can give another point of view is even dumber than simply DOSing any site.

Try this server instead (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601917)

aljazeerah [aljazeerah.info] .

Yeah (1)

quantaman (517394) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601919)

The buzz amongst my Muslim acquaintances is that the al-Jazeera site is under "cyber-attack."

And I'm sure they'll appreciate you causing the additional of ./ing the server as well :)

sad sad sad (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601921)

Ah that's the reason why I can't access the page for the past two days and I seriously depend on these news from them because I think it's more or less one of the real true sources of information from that area. I can't see the shit from CNN, MSNBC or certain german news agencys anymore. Please for god's sake, this is a too serious issue so whoever is responsible for this shit please stopp it and allow us to view the pages again.

You can't held Al Jazeera or the IRAQI people who only defend their children, their family and their little house responsible for the first step attack for George W. Bush and Tony Blair. Seriously, no one of us want war and 90% of this World was against that war. If you now see pictures of POW's then this is just a nature of WAR (not nice but that happens). If you have something against is then bad luck because IRAQI didn't started that war after all. CNN and MSNBC also showed IRAQI POW's on TV and don't forget the quantanamo AFGHANI people, they got treatened unworthy, chained foot, chained hands, towel pulled on their head more disgusting than anything else. Even dogs and cats are being treatened better than these humans. Yes they are humans at the end and need to get dealt respectfully with. The US administrative has nerves criticising the IRAQI administration with geneva convention while they shit on UN at first case. Now on your own news NETWORK you don't even get the information you want because of censorship (in a free country where you are allowed to say what you think and demonstrate, you have censorship).

Sorry people but this is disgusting. Leave Al Jazeera alone and allow the family either in EASTERN ASIA, U.S.A, U.K, and all other places to at least see the pictures and see what happens with the children and people there and what happens with their own children (are they prisoners or dead) who knows. But this attacking issue is immature and plain idiotic.

oGALAXYo

SAD SAD SADDAM! (0, Flamebait)

TheCeltic (102319) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601978)

Thankfully, The USA will soon finish FREEING IRAQ and KILLING SADAM AND HIS ARMIES!!! The other 90% of the world can pound sand if they don't like it.

Re:SAD SAD SADDAM! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5602011)

Yeah you showed the world what kind of narrowminded dumb person you are. Do you call killing children and civilians by an agressive first step war is 'freeing iraq' ? The people somehow don't want to get freed that way. If your government would spent the 74.7 billion US dollars in educating their kinds then people like you wouldn't act like dumb faggots. I'm muslim on my own and regardless of what happened 10-15 years back in IRAQ, it should have been solved during that time and not 15 years later where the whole region is peacefully calm.

oGALAXYo

Cyber attack successful... (1)

teqo (602844) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601932)

Now that they are being /.ed, they certainly are under cyber attack...

ip address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601936)

It is disturbing that name lookups on www.aljazeera.net are failing. Anyone have the ip? At least then, if the server is up, it should be possible to take a look.

Re:ip address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601972)

Check out http://english.daralhayat.com/, it still works. The English version of this site is arguably closer to the Arabic version than with Al Jazeera anyway.

Boycott this discussion! (1)

CowardNeal (627678) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601938)

Inappropriate story. I am boycotting this post!

An overloaded/DoS'ed news website... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601940)

...sounds to me like a perfect candidate for a secured (i.e. content cannot be altered except by the original author) P2P distribution system.

P2P to the rescue? (1)

VirexEye (572399) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601943)

I just poked around kazaa a bit and found the video of US soldiers that was shown to most of the world but censored in the US. Perhaps p2p could be used to distribute images from al-jazeera as well?

Yes p2p can be used for more than just music, movies, and porn...

Alternate News Sources (1)

Pete McCabe (660236) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601945)

I've found World Press Review to be a great source of news from other points of view. They are online at http://www.worldpress.org (Sorry, haven't quite grokked the insert-link process) and there's a print version as well. I've always thought this was a brilliant idea for a magazine: basically they reprint stories from news sources around the world. So they create very little of their own content; this is actually integral to their purpose.

Propaganda Mix (1)

jonathonc (267596) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601947)

In the past few days I've only been able to access the English version of the Aljazeera site for about 5 minutes. While it isn't the best news site out there it is good to mix their propaganda with US propaganda and come to your own conclusions halfway between the two.

Freedom Of Speech (1, Interesting)

N8F8 (4562) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601948)

I read a story today that Al-Jazeera was pleading with the US goverment to do somthing about the attacks and about two Al-Jazeera reporters bering kicked out of the NYSE. In the past week Al-Gazeera has gained 4 million subscribers in Europe but only 100K in the US.

All I have to say to all this is welcome to free speech. People can't stand in front of the Al-Jazeera ofices since they are in Quatar. Personally I think their broadcasts encite riots and extremists actions. They get the inside scoop with wonderful governments likethe Taliban and Saddam Husayn by acting as their propaganda arm.

I used to have a translation website where I could read their site and when I read what they were posting last week and watched their broadcast, the first thing that came to mind was to write a tiny app to pass around that would start DOSing their site. In the end I didn't since Al-Jazeera seems to be gettign the treatment it deserves. They've even been tossed out of Iran.

They should have printed my version of this story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601952)

Well I reported this story earlier. But sadly they didn't print my version of it. :( I think that taking down the al jazeera site is a classic example of the always stupid and ever popular "shoot the messanger" theory. This article (http://www.msnbc.com/news/643471.asp) on msnbc shows why al jazeera is important, whether you favor the war or not. Today's American journalism is overly ratings driven, hyperbolic and sensational. And don't forget Al Jazeera regularly rankles Arab audiences as well, making its journalists the subject of torture, beatings and death threats. This link (http://tarjim.ajeeb.com/ajeeb/default.asp?lang=1) is a great translation site for Arabic to English and unlike babelfish it works well. Besides h2Xors would do well to remember that most Iraqis don't use the internet, they are watching it on dish network. The only people they are keeping from the site are Americans.

hacked then slashdotted (1)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601959)



Damn kick them while they are down. First a DoS from script kiddies, then the slashdot effect.

So much for Freedom Of press.. (1)

Reservoir Penguin (611789) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601961)

They have also been banned from Wall Street, only
good news networks like foxnews and cnn are allowed. Evetrything is well, the war is on track, we'll take Baghdad on Tuesday, Basra is not important ,oops we changed our minds lets take Basra first. Iraqis are lining up for free bubble gum. 1000000 iraqis troops have surrenderd, Saddam is figting alone after being killed atleast 7 times. Makes me sick

Al-Dschasira gets kicked out from more places.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601962)

Spiegel Online [spiegel.de] , a renowned German news magazine, covers the hacker attacks on the web site.

It also reports that Al D reporters have now been banned from reporting from the New York Stock exchange because of 'other priorities' (words of NYSE VP).

The article further features a Reuters (US owned) press photo of a dead Iraki soldier. Its world-wide dissemination, including to US media, was never protested, while pictures of dead US soldiers were reason enough for very public protests against Al D...

Your script kiddies (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601969)

are unlawful combattants.

The Geneva conventions don't apply to them.

I'm coming over for some raping!

Well, (1)

omarius (52253) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601976)

It certainly is, now that you've slashdotted it.

-Omar

Why script kiddie when u have the slashdot effect (1)

slappy_guru (230776) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601979)

http://www.aljazeera.net/

Now go get em :)

Of course they are DoS-ed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601984)

Surely they are DoS-ed. They just appeared on Slashdot.

Vilmos

Freenet? (5, Interesting)

gfilion (80497) | more than 11 years ago | (#5601987)

Would it be a good idea for Al-jazeera to publish their content on freenet [sf.net] ? Their articles would then be immune to any kind of censorship like they claim they are victim of.

All a ploy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5601999)

Looks like the 1337 |1d13z have launched the most severe "cyber-attack" yet...a slashdotting.

-Psy

ABC cuts gore from injured child's Iraq war photo (4, Informative)

ivi (126837) | more than 11 years ago | (#5602003)


Australia's ABC (TV, I suppose) has reportedly
cropped the portion of a picture of a young
girl's feet, which were to be seen dangling,
after apparently having been blown loose by
an explosion, in the ongoing Irag war.

The report of this "editting" the gore away,
to make a photo more acceptible to Australian
viewing audiences, as well as other revealing
aspects of media censorship, were mentioned on
this morning's Media Report, now available via
audio-on-demand, in RealAudio format, at:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/mediarpt/audio /mediarpt_27032003_2856.ram

This 27 March program included British photo-
journalist Tim Page talking about this kind
of selective reporting & sanitizing of war
images, eg, from Vietnam to Iraq.

Come back in about a week for the transcript,
eg at URL:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/mediarpt/sto ri es/s815573.htm

War solves nothing... unless, of course,
your company is selling to Defense...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...