Anonymous leaks personal information of Senators who voted for the Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

[Cali_Democrat]

Anonymous aims to make US Senators accountable for their votes
Posted on 20 December 2011.

A group of Anonymous-affiliated hackers has made public a considerable amount of detailed personal information of the majority of the 86 US Senators that voted for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The Pastebin entry includes information such as dates of birth, spouse and children names, addresses, phone numbers, Twitter accounts, memberships in various committees, information about education, profession and religion, their staff, previous votes on a number of issues, their campaign contributors, suites filed against them, and more.

<...>

According to Softpedia, some US citizens have already seized on the information offered and have been sending accusations of treason to a number of the Senators who voted Yea.

<...>

"This is an open letter to the US leaders," wrote the hackers. "We've been watching you systematically destroy the rights of your own people, one law at a time. No longer shall we stand by and watch you enslave our fellow citizens. You have continued down this path of treason by creating acts such as the National Defense Authorization Act, Stop Online Piracy Act, Protect IP Act, and more. You've tried to conceal the true purpose of these bills, and pass them without the consent of the American people."

Read more: http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=12125

[SpiralHawk]

1. The cyber war wears on

in waves

[Zalatix]

2. Oooh! STUNG!!!!! Go, anonymous!! K&R!

[rhett o rick]

3. Our overlords and their Congress are becoming more blatant.

The oligarchy is here.

[graywarrior]

4. Whoa

Al Franken!

[Angry Dragon]

5. It lists Franken, I thought he voted against it......

Added: I double checked and he did vote against it

[joshcryer]

12. He voted against the final bill but voted for certain amendments to it.

So maybe that's the reason for the mixup.

[Cali_Democrat]

23. Interesting

I didn't know that.

[provis99]

24. he voted for it before he voted against it.

He voted for the Senate version of the bill, and voted against the final conference version, which had no relevant changes.

Franken pissed me off with his cynical politicking on this issue.

[joshcryer]

26. And I thought he was voting for it because of the veto threat...

...and I thought it was all a smart political move. Made me look like an idiot.

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. Oops

I guess these congresscritters think that this NDAA will NEVER affect them?


They are immune from their actions against the rest of us FOR ALL TIME?

I am sure that the repugs think that is true.

[zazen]

7. publishing "spouses and children's names" and personal info is too much

I'm all for aggressively calling people out.

Alan Grayson provides a marvelous example of brutal truth-telling and confrontation, and he doesn't need the names and personal information of his opponents' spouses and children to do it.

Or am I missing something? This just seems a little much.

[tledford]

8. Are the names of Senators' spouses and children state secrets?

Even when they're published in newspapers and magazines?

[zazen]

9. but why would they be re-published, if not to send a message

No, someone can find them out.

See, I like the idea of making a list of Wall Street offenders a lot more accessible to hundreds of thousands of people, so we can call and write them. I'm all for that (if it doesn't move into criminal territory, of course.) And perhaps they aren't state secrets. But having them all in one place for easy access would make it a lot easier for us to get their attention.

But spouses and children of these people, Wall Street or elected officials? I think republishing that info, esp anything more personal about them than their names, hurts our cause.

[Angry Dragon]

10. You could be correct

but on the other hand they have no problem telling you which people you can love, which sexual positions you are allowed. So where does the intrusion into your personal life end??

Don't you have the right to know everything you want about the people you employ??

[zazen]

13. they _are_ intrusive, but "everything" doesn't include other people

I agree that the behavior of a majority of right-wingers is odious. But their spouses and children are separate people, not objects of their actions. Even if this information could be found out in the public domain, to put it all in one place sends a message that they are "fair game." That may not be what this group intended, but it's a reasonable consequence.

Again, I think we can be very creative and aggressive (within the bounds of the law) in opposing people without resorting to this.

[Angry Dragon]

14. What would you suggest be done??

My school of thought is that if someone wants to pry into my personal life and tell me how to live it gives me the right to pry into theirs'. If they happen to find this intrusive then perhaps they will rethink their position.

[zazen]

16. but spouses and children aren't the indirect objects of "their" personal life

Personal lives refer to actions, things that can be owned by the person who's executing them. Spouses and children aren't actions--they're other people.

I don't have anything specific at the moment, except that of course, the bravery of the Occupy movements is an example, as is the moral and in-your-face equivalent of Alan Grayson reading out the names in session, district by district, of the people who died as a result of lack of health insurance. They're dead, so nobody's going to harass them based on their names being read out, and it was a deliberate calling out of the monsters who were happy to let them die and decrease the surplus population. Of course, they invested millions to get him voted out for precisely that behavior, but it's that sort of calling out I'm talking about.

If spouses are lobbyists in the industry being questioned, then maybe that can be mentioned.

Keep kids out of it, unless they're over 30 and lobbying in the same industry too.

[Angry Dragon]

18. Here is my take

Politicians want a job, they ask for votes, you vote for them or not, the one elected is your employee.
A lot of politicians want to pass laws that have a direst on your personal life. Religion, wages, sex come to mind.
Religion and sex are very personal. How these laws effect you also has an effect on the people around you.
Tell me why the same effect should not apply to politicians??

My personal belief is that children should be off limits. But when it comes to laws that effect children that I know then it becomes a different story. I have found that people that want to tell others how to live the only way to wake them up is to treat them the same way they treat you. How do you stop a bully?? And that is what a lot of these politicians are today. Deciding who can get married, what god you believe in. I am getting fed up with it. It is time for government to back off.

Politicians have no problem bringing their families into the political races to show how much of a family man or woman they are, are christian they are, are much they value the family but have no trouble telling you that you do not share these values.

I do not know the answer.

[kestrel91316]

21. [phone]

[think]

15. Naming women and children is never acceptable even if it is public information. Still these Senators

need to be held accountable for having the audacity to propose subjugating the constitution and allowing US citizens to be held indefinitely without a trial. I consider this a treasonous act. These Senators need to be run out of office.

We should have zero tolerance for politicians that willingly attack the freedom of the American people.

This is NOT North Korea!

[kestrel91316]

19. I'm pretty sure spouses' and children's name are PUBLIC INFORMATION,

and readily available on Congressmembers' websites, lol.

[TheKentuckian]

25. These aren't opponents, they are enemies and merciless ones at that.

[Ohio Joe]

11. Looks more like a google search and not a hack

"The hackers don't claim to have stolen the information following a breach, and the document seems to have been compiled from information collected from a variety of sources accessible to the public."

It looks like they got Franken wrong... I wonder how many others are wrong. Putting out bad info from a google search is bad enough but including the kids is just plain shitty.

[marasinghe]

17. there's a saying: 'No Justice, No Peace'. i agree anon shouldn't involve innocent civilians. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

20. I'm not at all on board with a small group of people making our elected representatives "pay"

for the way they vote. God forbid a conservative group of script-kiddies did the same thing. We'd be fucking HOWLING if every Dem in Congress had his or her most sensitive information and that of their relatives and their staff members and THEIR relatives laid out for the world to see as a kind of "arm-twisting".

[justiceischeap]

28. Dems are included in this

I think our elected representatives should pay for their actions but not in the way you're implying. They should not get reelected, Dem or Repub, if they act against America's best interests. And anyone, IMO, that voted for NDAA should not be reelected.

[Cali_Democrat]

29. I agree

People who voted for the NDAA are trying to strip civil liberties from the American people and they should be punished.

[T S Justly]

22. Daresay, that's a mild response. (nt)

[Laelth]

27. k&r for right action. Keep the heat on! n/t

-Laelth

[katty]

30. K&R!

[katty]

31. This is a heinous act-it is so totally un-American, un-Constituitional - makes the head spin

only a completely poisoned body politic could come up with this.