Suzie Dawson is an awesome example of someone who has taken their own life experiences of pain, humiliation and presumably devastation, and become such a powerful voice for justice.
Thanks for posting this Rayzer... important to get out this message. Regards, Zenaan On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 08:33:48PM -0700, Rayzer wrote: > A pretty good rundown of how social disruption works. ... > Lots of links and embedded images of tweets etc in-post... > Read online: > http://theindicter.com/the-weaponising-of-social-part-1-the-crucifixion-of-ioerror/ > > theindicter.com > > The Weaponising Of Social Part 1: The Crucifixion of IOError > > by The Indicter > > Thanks to a small group of supposed anonymity-protecting privacy > activists thousands of people now know the name of Jacob Appelbaum’s > fiancée`. Even those that didn’t want to. > > We found it out by reading an extremely controversial website launched a > week ago, that had a few sparse accounts of some nasty sounding > happenings allegedly involving Jacob, with promises of more to come. > > No one truly concerned with privacy issues should care if Jacob has a > fiancée let alone who she is, out of respect for his right to a private > life and because it is patently obvious that attacks on him shouldn’t > extend to her. > > Her name was later removed after the bulk of the damage had been done, > without any editorial admission that it had ever been there in the first > place. > > Unfortunately, that simple yet far-reaching invasion of privacy, is only > the tip of the iceberg. > > [Update 12/06/16: Detractors are claiming the above is factually > incorrect as they say Appelbaum is no longer engaged. The source was the > smear website itself, which named Appelbaum’s ‘partner’, then removed > her name and called her his ‘fiancée’, and now implies past tense. IMO, > who he is or isn’t engaged to is frankly his own business. The point > stands.] > > Preamble > > In a strange paradox, Jacob Appelbaum’s accusers both want to deny any > relevance between their accusations and him being a known target of the > US government as a result of the nature of his work, while having the > clearly stated aim of wanting to prevent him from being able to continue it. ...
