Operation Payback: Facebook BANNED Our Page

Anonymous, an activist hacker group that has been disabling websites in a show of support for WikiLeaks, claims that Facebook has just banned its page.

Anonymous tweeted via its "Operation Payback" Twitter account, @Anon_Operation, "FACEBOOK JUST BANNED OUR PAGE," with a screenshot of a notice from Facebook that its page, "Operation Payback" was "removed for violating our Terms of Use." (See screenshot below)

Facebook's notice reads,

A Facebook Page is a distinct presence used solely for business or promotional purposes. Among other things, Pages that are hateful, threatening, or obscene are not allowed. We also take down Pages that attack n individual or group, or that are set up by an unauthorized individual.

Operation Payback describes itself as "an ongoing campaign by Anonymous against major anti-piracy & anti-freedom entities." Recently, MasterCard, Visa, PayPal, Sarah Palin, Joe Lieberman, and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's Swedish prosecutor have all been targeted by the group.

Although several Facebook Pages with the name "Operation Payback" remain on Facebook, including Wikileaks „Operation Payback" and Operation Payback - Julian Assange is a hero not a criminal, it is not clear that these are affiliated with Anonymous.

While companies like MasterCard, Visa, and PayPal have cut ties with WikiLeaks, Facebook has thus far allowed the website to maintain its presence on the social networking site. With regard to the possibility that Facebook might remove WikiLeaks' Page, a Facebook spokesperson told ReadWriteWeb, "The Wikileaks Facebook Page does not violate our content standards nor have we encountered any material posted on the page that violates our policies."

Regarding Anonymous' allegations that Facebook removed its Page, a Facebook spokesperson told HuffPostTech:

We take our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities very seriously and react quickly to reports of inappropriate content and behavior. Specifically, we're sensitive to content that includes pornography, bullying, hate speech, and threats of violence. We also take action on content that we find or that's reported to us that promotes unlawful activity. The goal of these policies is to strike a very delicate balance between giving people the freedom to express their opinions and viewpoints even those that may be controversial to some and maintaining a safe and trusted environment.

LOOK:

Comments

[Sam Andrews]

08:51 AM on 12/15/2010

I’ve been up the last two evenings breathing and resonating with a new universal sense of individual freedom. This is all thanks to WikiLeaks and an intriguing diplomatic cable regarding the 1990 release of Nelson Mandela.

I’ve been inspired and I simply ask for fellow forward-thinking enthusiasts to reply back and start a discussion with me. The discussion topic: I propose a new artistic platform in which my fellow, youthful brethren may join their voice with the collective voice. As WE, Mankind as a whole, start our ascent into the Age of Aquarius, we must strengthen this collective voice; give it a new validity and re-invigorate the substance and heart behind Our Brave New World.

I am an artist with a receptive eye. I’m a jazz pianist, writer/poet, filmmaker, and a storyteller. I’m a true artist and so are you. Let’s confront this new flat world with an unflinching, all-defying energy and vigor as we stare into the vacuum of it’s eyes and create new meaning.

You all Inspire me, and I know I’ll Inspire you…it’s now a perpetual groove and I hope to collaborate with you all soon.

-Samuel Curtis 12/15/10 7:15AM

[izzydoesit]

12:42 AM on 12/11/2010

For those who think that cyber civil disobedience, disorganized as it may be, is a juvenile waste of time, let me ask you: what are YOU doing to stop the erosion of free speech and the destruction of democracy in this country? Tearing down others seems to be the American National Pastime, but it takes more guts to risk censure than to criticize those who do.
And for those who think the hackers and Wikileaks are criminals and ought to be imprisoned, fined, or assassinated, then you have to extend that harsh punishment for others who have committed grave crimes, like the traders/bankers on Wall Street who knowingly created a Ponzi scheme that wrecked the American economy, and members of the Bush administration who knowingly took this country into war on false pretenses and murdered thousands of innocent Iraquis. But neither group was punished; in fact, Wall Street was rewarded with millions of our tax dollars, and the Bushies extracted millions from war profiteering.
Since 9/11, due process of law no longer exists, and now the government is using totalitarian strong arm tactics to silence those who want to uncover their egregious oppression, not only of their own citizens, but of every country in the world. The truth is in the news if you care to read it.
We've already been disabused that our country is invincible, but the uglier threat is right here at home.

[vkmo]

02:47 PM on 12/10/2010

I posted criticism on the internet of JA. In retaliation my ID has been attacked and the attacks are continuing. Since Dec 2 my ID has been attacked over 150 times. These attacks were termed "unauthorized attack" by my antivirus provider. JA supporters are not in favor of free speech, they want to HURT you if you criticise them.

[iCode v2]

05:52 AM on 01/27/2011

[ citation needed ]

[JohnLloydScharf]

11:01 AM on 12/10/2010

Operation Payback is a criminal gang:
http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1362NEW.htm
... civil defense functions of the United States, whether constructed or in process of construction, or willfully or maliciously interferes in any way with the working or use of any such line, or system, or willfully or maliciously obstructs, hinders, or delays the transmission of any communication over any such line, or system, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

[obelis kreative]

01:32 PM on 12/12/2010

Same can be said about Watergate, exposing privileged information.

[JohnLloydScharf]

10:19 AM on 12/10/2010

In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States the act did not violate the free speech rights of those convicted under its provisions. While a great deal of caselaw on free speech has evolved since then, the key feature of the US Code is those involved intend or know "... information is to be used to the injury of the United States..." That the names of Afghan individuals who have been allies of the US were revealed, injuring US military and diplomatic mission there, is a fact. In the text of the US Code, the onus is put on those who released the information to prove they did not intend that.

As it now stands, the duty of the Attorney General is to seek indict Julian Assange and seek his extradition. Like so many other failure to uphold the law by the Obama Administration, the prospect of that happening, however, is unlikely.

[JohnLloydScharf]

10:19 AM on 12/10/2010

In Presidential Order 12958 it is clear Julian Assange is in violation in, Part 1. Original Classification, Sec. 1.1. Classification Standards that: (b) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.(c) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 793 : US Code - Section 793: Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a ten year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine are the sanctions, "(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy."

Interfering with military operations and supporting America's enemies during wartime, promoting insubordination in the military, or interfering with with military recruitment are prohibited .

[JohnLloydScharf]

10:18 AM on 12/10/2010

The Pentagon told Julain Assange his actions risk the lives of U.S. soldiers and Afghan citizens and could possibly undermine military operations against extremists in Afghanistan.

Members of the Taliban were studying the documents to retaliate against any informants cooperating with the U.S. military long before Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission spokesman Nadery said, "There was no consideration about civilian lives," after noticing a rise in assassinations of Afghan civilians seen as government collaborators.

[interlude]

02:41 AM on 12/10/2010

And yet Facebook allows Palin to continue to spew her hate.

[Morgantheaxe]

02:07 AM on 12/10/2010

Hackers are not activists, anarchists, or anything else i've read in this thread. They are no different than a punk throwing a rock through a window, or spray painting grafiti. Put it this way. If you stood in line at a bank and stopped all traffic going in to the tellers the police would come and take you to a psychiatric facility for observation. Then you would be charged with a misdemeanor. If you invaded someones home and sabotaged their television you would be charged with breaking and entering. These people should be treated exactly the same way. There is no glory here. Just a group of petty criminals with an emphasis on petty.

[MrDOB]

08:57 AM on 12/10/2010

I see you point and agree. I only ask that the same law breakers that Wikileaks exposed get arrested and put in jail like the thugs criminals they are. What else can the average citizen do within legal means to call attention to the actual crimes that were and are being committed?

[Morgantheaxe]

09:02 PM on 12/10/2010

You know what got wikileaks in trouble? A complete lack of editing. If they had just released important moral violations they would have been fine. When they chose to release the memos btw diplomats that were embarressing but pointless they lost their moral footing. Saudis are funeling money to al qaeda....a winner. Hillary clinton thinks Burlesconi is a putz? Needlessly embarressing to our country and harmful to diplomatic efforts. First do no harm....it's a great rule to follow.

[fotochronicle]

12:35 PM on 12/10/2010

here is a link about breaking and entering...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

[karots]

09:44 PM on 12/09/2010

If I have to read another article where they talk about "anonymous" as if it is some cogent group with motives and ideals behind it I am going to barf.

[SamKnause]

10:22 PM on 12/09/2010

Then why do you keep reading the articles, and why are you posting about it?
Have you heard the cyber messages on You Tube?
They would really make your head explode.

I think this is very exciting !!!!!!!!!!!!

[karots]

10:42 PM on 12/09/2010

Oh and I post about it because I can.

[karots]

11:58 PM on 12/09/2010

I wrote a longer reply but someone saw fit to delete it for some unexplainable reason. I'll just say that the "attacks" are stup1d and detrimental to the cause of WL's and anyone who partakes in them will probably end up regretting it once more legislation gets passed under the guise of protecting us from the scary "internet terrurists"

[thegirlnextdoor]

04:42 PM on 12/09/2010

I really weary of all the folks who feel they have to hate communications sites like facebook. In our community it is used to do just that, communicatte and create community. I see all my facebook friends in the course of a month, many more often than that. We keep informed about the arts in our community, and more recently, we have all kept quite up to date about wikeleaks including signing the avazz petition.
If you don't like it don't use it.

[5SpdSolara]

04:17 PM on 12/09/2010

21st century anarchy...

[meena140]

04:11 PM on 12/09/2010

Palin Complains Hackers Violated Free Speech, But She Scrubs Even ‘Benign’ Content From Her Own Website
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/09/palin-free-speech/

[ALipschitz]

10:58 AM on 12/09/2010

I wonder if the hackers behind these attacks are also responsible for the malware that infected my machine the day before yesterday. It even installed a fake version of Microsoft's free Antivirus software and it displayed that I had a virus. I was suspicious, because the message didn't seem quite right. I went out to the web and I was directed to urls that I wasn't trying to go to and they appeared to be fake versions of popular antivirus websites.

I rarely have a problem with viruses then this suddenly happens. Are the hackers using our machines to hit their targets?

[JonPubliq]

11:13 AM on 12/09/2010

That is nothing new, it's old malware. You either clicked on a bad link or visited a bad porn site. Download Malware bytes Antimalware, it's free and an excellent scanner.

[thegirlnextdoor]

04:43 PM on 12/09/2010

or get avast! installed. It worked well to get rid of the dreaded redirect malware and has kept me free of that for a long time now.

[trojoe]

10:56 AM on 12/09/2010

Behind you 200% wikileaks and hacktivists.