Amid a sea of crime and violence, residents of Veracruz, Mexico face another potential threat: cyber terrorism. Last month, residents were frightened upon reading several twitter and facebook posts in which two users falsely reported bomb threats, gunfire at an elementary school and that members of a drug cartel kidnapped 5 children at an area primary school.
Dozens of traffic accidents occurred as parents rushed to rescue their children from the alleged kidnapers. The chaos also caused major congestion on emergency phone lines.
State officials responded to the pandemonium by arresting Gilberto Martinez Vera and Maria de Jesus Bravo Pagola, who now face up to 30 years for sabotage and terrorism.
According to CNN.com Veracruz Gov. Javier Duarte said in a Twitter post after the arrests that, "Social networks are an excellent way to communicate, but sadly there are cowardly people who hide behind them only to hurt."
In recent months, websites like Twitter and Facebook have become trusted sources for Veracruz residents to get information about current events due in large part to the growing feeling of distrust toward the mass media, PC Mag.com suggests. "The media is so terrified of bloodshed inflicted by these ruthless gangs that it is often hesitant to cover legitimate stories about drug-related activity. Accordingly, people often turn to social media for real time reports about criminal activity in the country."
Groups like Amnesty International are stepping in the midst of the controversy, releasing a statement last month to encourage the Mexican Government to provide the accused, "a fair trial and freedom of expression.
--
Although the verdict is still out on whether Vera an Pagola will spend the next 30 years behind bars, the controversy raises important questions about the intersection of national security and freedom of expression.
Links:
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/09/07/mexico.twitter.analysts/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392528,00.asp
I read this article and I think the implications of it are disturbing. But are you suggesting that this was really an act of cyberterrorism?
ReplyDeleteFrom what I know, the couple only re-tweeted information that turned out to be false. While it caused a lot of stress for those involved, in the end no one was hurt. And even if people were hurt in the resulting panic, I don't see how this couple broke any laws.
First of all, the word "cyberterrorism,"just like "terrorism" is one of those words that is purposely left vague and undefined because it allows governments to apply it any person or group that challenges the status quo.
I would argue that if we're going to use this word it should apply equally to the actions of both governments and hackers.
"Cyberterrorism," to me, is when the U.S. government puts pressure on the Swedish police to storm the headquarters of The Pirate Bay and seize their servers, despite the fact that its workers weren't breaking any of their country's copyright laws.
"Cyberterrorism" is also when the U.S. military uses software to create a virtual army of fake Facebook profiles; phantom users that can lend their support to our country's wars of aggression. (http://bullionbullscanada.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&id=6813&catid=11&Itemid=122)
In the first case violence is being used in order to stifle internet freedom. In the second, the internet is being used to lend support to campaigns of political violence in the Middle East.
Until this double standard ends and we can apply this word equally to electronic terrorism carried out by our own government, I would suggest that we all just throw out the word. This kind of muddled language only makes it harder to discuss issues that are relevant to all of us.
-Dan G.