Slashdot Mirror
Falun Gong Hacks Chinese Satellite
maetenloch writes: "Last week Falun Gong hackers in China were able to briefly take over the Sinosat-1 satellite and broadcast a banner for several minutes on all channels of China Central Television. This was apparently repeated several time on different channels on Sunday but so far the Chinese government has imposed a news blackout on the incident. However thanks to the Internet and the millions of witnesses, word has leaked out. Surprisingly, security on satellites can be very weak - often transponders are left on when not active and will continue to rebroadcast whatever is beamed at them. It's believed that Falun Gong used a 3 meter dish antenna mounted on a vehicle to overpower the government's uplink signal. This is not the only time that satellite signals have been hacked - there was the famous 'Captain Midnight' incident in 1986 and it's believed that Iraq has been attacking Kurdish satellite tv channels for several years. Hackers have even (discreetly) made use of the U.S. Navy's FleetSatCom satellites."
Whatever you think of Falun Gong vs. The Chinese Government, you've got to admit that this is a cool hack. The kind of thing you used to see in 'futuristicky' 1980's sci-fi movies.
Moments like this, along with the Anthrax outbreak last year, are beginning to define socio-political conflict in the 21st Century.
"Why did they cancel my favorite Sci-Fi show? I downloaded ALL the episodes!"
Click here or here.
The government has been cracking down on this supposedly spiritual movement. This would surely stoke the fire even more.
I don't why they would want to do this. This is hardly a good public relations move. Smells like a childish prank by some teenagers.
No doubt the most of the Falun Gonger's are mortified by now.
"I feel kinda like god." The chinese are horrible at defacing websites. I mean come on. Can't you be a little clever and do something more exciting than "Hacked by Chinese!" or "Falun Gong is Good!"
With the internet now readily available in Beijing, it's very difficult for the ChiComs to keep news like this from the general public. I seems to me at first glance that tricks like this could be a good way to undermine a particular government's confidence in it's "right" to rule. Similar stunts all put together over many years time (e.g. Boston Tea Party) have worked in the past...
Error: Success
Friends of Falun Gong
The Falun Gong take on the story is here:
Revealing Broadcasts Are Truly Serving the People-- From the Editors of FalunInfo.net: Falun Gong Practitioners Risk their Lives to Tell the Truth
If you would like to help out the cause, there is a page about it here:
Become a Friend- Alleviate the Suffering, End the Injustice
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
[hint for those who don't know what I mean: on a computer with a misconfig'd open proxy, this usually can be found by scanning for an open port 8080]
Because the Chinese government aren't exactly great at the whole freedom of speech thing.
Because they've been imprisoning Falun Gong members for years now.
Because Falun Gong feel that they have no way of expressing their views to the population.
Saying that, this isn't exactly a clever thing to do. I can't imagine the Government are going to take it very well. Of course, unless the government are doing it themselves to discredit Falun Gong, but that's getting a bit Ollie Stone for me...
Are we very sure they weren't trying to signal AMSAT-OSCAR 7 and just missed?
Never confuse volume with power.
From what (little) I know about Falun Gong, hacking a satellite doesn't sound like something they'd do, since it's much more likely to be illegal than a sit-down type protest, and MUCH more likely to bring the jackboots down on them.
I'm inclined to think it was some other band of kiddiez that just wanted a good cover for their actions, like the "Hacked By Chinese" incidents from last year.
-----
Darwin is an evolutionary OS...
--
Apple hardware still too expensive for you? How about a raffle ticket?
Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
Try "Civil Rights Activists", and before you rail at me for being some so-called militant leftist, why don't you actually research the recent government reaction to the Falung Gong movement in China.
So I guess you see nothing wrong with the civil rights violations associated with the chinese government. As long as it's not agains their laws.
Since you said you're an American, don't you realize that you're an American only because some TERRORISTS back in the 1700's decided to BREAK THE LAW and rebel against their government?
Funny, what do you think happened during our war of independence? Surely all of our soldiers in the war were terrorists. I'm sure had the events taken place a few hundred years later you would see us doing similar things as you see here.
The problem is that no clear-cut definition of what a terrorist is exists at this point. I call upon the US and International bodies to come up with a clear, accurate, definition of what a terrorist is. Otherwise, every common criminal (or accused person) could be labelled a terrorist and end up losing their rights granted by the constitution.
What?
I doubt they will be branded as terrorists, since no harm or threat was caused by this prank. However, the government will be in its rights to question every FG member, and maybe arrest a lot of them for participation in this deed.
But the more FG does what it just did, the clearer it becomes for the West that FG is indeed what Chinese government claimed all along - an army of militants, not a health club. The hack of a satellite falls into territory of sabotage and propaganda, something that health clubs don't do.
Not true... I was using circa 1970 equipment in the mid 90's when I was doing satellite control/operations.
Are the Falun terrorists for "hijacking" Chinese TV? Or are they rebels in a quest against the evil empire?
Insofar as they aren't practicing any actual form of terror, I'm going to vote "not terrorist."
To the best of my knowledge, they aren't...
I think, at worst, you could call them an insurgent organization. But in my book, no terror = no terrorism - and popping "falun gong is good" on the telly signal for a few seconds is not "terror" by any definition I've ever heard.
No, terrorizing people to make yourself heard makes you a terrorist.
Sit-ins are not terrorism. (They're ususally stupid, but that's another issue.)
I fear that this incident will prove highly counter-productive to Fa Lun Gong.
For the Chinese man on the street, who might not sympathize with Fa Lun Gong (many that I know don't), an act like this marks them as trouble-makers who have clearly gone beyond passive resistance.
For the Chinese government, this incident allows them to go to the American government and claim that Fa Lun Gong is a bunch of religious cyber-terrorists. An excuse to crack down on illicit internet-cafes, rights of religious freedoms (they can claim that religion preaches terrorism), and hackers in general (ala US-styled counter-cyber-terrorism proposals).
For American policy makers, this seems similar to Al-Qaeda cyber-terrorism scenarios, where a telecom disruption might occur concurrently with a physical attack, thus disrupting the C4 capabilities of the emergency support teams.
Get real. This isn't like in "Hackers" or "Johny Mnemonic" where the good guy hackers hack TV to expose The Man.
Patiwat Panurach
patiwat@sloan.mit.edu
By that defenition, the self bombing palestenians who are resisting the
israeli occupation are NOT terrorists but freedom fighters. Do I read you
correctly?
They could have hacked the satellite and broadcast some decent programs.
Anybody fancy making a similar effort as regards ITV? (preferably Saturday evening about 7 o'clock)
From my Autobiography - "Lifestyles of the Sad and Desperate"...
I've not read the parent... but I'll just comment on Falungong anyway. I have no respect for them.
They lie about being the ones to develop qigong (which has been around for thousands of years)
They use spirituality to promote their own political agenda.
And, what makes me the most mad, their leader hides out in NY while he has his followers in China gettings themselves killed (both by burning themselves and pulling stunts like this)
I'd call it a personality cult.
Oh -- and they have no political plan that's viable. This, in my opinion, is very irresponsible and dangerous. Many millions of people would die should there be revolution in china. many millions more would die if there wasn't a VERY strong government after the revolution.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Watch the news lately?
You need a FREE iPod Nano
I'm sure Martin Luther King and Ghandi would be amused to hear civil disobedience equated with terrorism. And in the logic of civil disobedience, it's justifiable to violate an unjust law.
You need to be thinking on the next level up.
...phil
"For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
All things aside, in the US at least, what is the punishment for a private individual or a company hijacking a satellite signal? With this in mind, is it more cost effective for a company to do it themselves or pay a fall guy an inordinate sum to hijack a satellite and enter a plea of guilty, or to legitimately buy superbowl commercial time :)
I know, it wouldn't work, the bad press that followed would be bad for most companies, (then again it might work for a beer company, or maybe apple computers...) but it is a fun thought.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Then, when people peacefully protested about the banning of "football", they were arrested and some of them were taken to detention camps. Then the government started using propaganda to demonise "footballers" as a bizarre cult who encourage their members to kill themselves.
What do you do? You can't participate in "football", and you can't tell you fellow citizens that the government is wrong about "football" because they a) control all the media, and b) aren't afraid to arrest anyone who supports "football". In these circumstances, you might even argue that it's reasonable for you to attempt armed rebellion against this totalitarian regime.
Now, what these guys have chosen to do, by comparison, is the most non-violent thing they could do to press their case - they've temporarily hacked the TV system to tell people that they don't sacrifice newborns by the full moon and that the government is being unreasonable and paranoid.
What kind of militancy is that?
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
They could be seen as both. So could the Israeli soldiers who storm through Palestenian villages be seen as terrorists or "enforcers of law and order". It all depends on who is writing the book.
Despite what GW Bush would like us to think, rarely is it the case where a person is "pure evil" or "pure good". It all depends on whos perspective you are looking from.
There's nothing hard to understand, unless you're a slashbot trying to be clever.
If it ain't broke, you need more software.
Considering the PRC government's stance and actions in regard to Falun Gong, you can imagine what a hot little item a video tape containing any of these broadcasts would be, and how long you'd sit in a prison cell for even showing it to the neighbors.
It's somewhat reminiscent of this quote: Leia: "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
IMO, the definition of "Terrorist" is not "Using crime to make yourself heard", but "Using crime to create fear and TERROR." - A key part of the word TERRORist.
Terrorists use violence to make themselves heard, not generic crime.
Using crime to make yourself heard is either simply immature (generic vandalism), or is activism (The civil rights movement, a key part of which was civil disobedience.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
By that defenition, the self bombing palestinians who are resisting the
israeli occupation are NOT terrorists but freedom fighters.
You see, that's the whole point: terrorism is a label that can be conveniently slapped on just about anyone. You did not answer the poster's question, but I don't suppose you would consider the "freedom fighters" that fought against the british rule over what is now the US to be terrorists. Well to the palestinians, it's the same fight, and they fight it with the only means they have been given: weapons and bombs.
Don't go thinking for a split second that I advocate attacks against civilians of any kind: I don't. I just don't believe that stigmatizing some groups as evil terrorists solves anything. The concept of "terrorism" is empty, and much to emotional to be of any use in a level-headed discussion, unless of course you want to buy into all of the propaganda we've been seeing in the last months.
"I remember Y1K, every abacus had to get another bead"
The greatest Kung Fu. They are unbeatable.
Oh, right, like that time in 1777 when colonists sneaked onto a ship to London and killed a 5-year-old girl.
--
Benjamin Coates
If you are foreigner, then treaty applies. If you are a foreigner and part of regular army, treaty plus international law applies.
The Constitution applies to people within the United States, including non-citizens, illegal aliens, and enemy soldiers (but military law applies to that last group too).
--
Benjamin Coates
ianal, imho, ymmv, dttah.
Yep. As are the IRA, ETA, etc. One man's terriorist is another man's freedom fighter, it all depends on what side of the fence you sit on.
Whilst I don't (of course) condone Palestinians blowing up Isreali buses, I also condem Isreali tanks destroying Palestinian villages (and for that matter, American planes bombing Afghan weddings). I view all those actions as equally reprehensible, there is no distinction simply because some of these acts are carried out by individuals, and some by governments. They are all acts of war, plain and simple.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Funny, what do you think happened during our war of independence? Surely all of our soldiers in the war were terrorists. I'm sure had the events taken place a few hundred years later you would see us doing similar things as you see here.
The soldiers for the US War of Independence were not terrorists. They were declared combatants fighting for an open and stated (albeit new) government entity and represented the majority opinion of its people. It was a militia. It was open war. They were not attacking civilians. They were attacking military targets to end a conflict.
Also, by the definition of today, The Boston Tea Party would be considered Grad Felony Vandalism, Grand Larceny, and Conspiracy to Commit Grand Larceny. Hardly terrorism. Terrorist try to kill innocents. Early Americans killed tea. People were not killed until around the time that British troops took Boston over. Until the ARMIES showed up, there was precious little killing going on other than protest killings in Boston and other nearby areas.
The idea of a terrorist is based specifically on the definition of a combatant (soldier). It is in the Geneva Convention. Read up. The definitions are specific. Falun Gong deserves to not be called terrorists for this... crackers, yes. Terrorists? NO.
I would say that both of the posts are incorrect, upon the definition of a terrorist alone. The purpose of a terrrorist is to incite fear through the act of attacking innocents or government agencies through stealth and subversion.
Pasting a message up on television across China is hardly a terrorist act by definition, because it neither attacks innocents or creates fear and widespread panic. It is a plea to change the policies of the government, not an attack on that government or its citizens. The message was NOT DANGEROUS other than stating its views.
However... we (US Citizens) often forget that we are lucky to have been born in a country where you are allowed to have opinions that may go against our current government leaders, and you don't worry about it and can speak them openly.
In China, stating your views can get you killed.
So, in your definition the attacks of, say, USS Cole and The Pentagon were not acts of terrorism?
Those were definitly military targets.
Just curious what you think about this.
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
No, it doesn't, you putz.
No one called Martin Luther King, Jr. a terrorist. That's because he didn't attack and/or kill civilians while fighting for civil rights.
This is something that left-wing, anti-American pinheads purposely obfuscate: TERRORISTS ARE TERRORISTS BECAUSE THEY INTENTIONALLY ATTACK CIVILIANS TO ADVANCE A POLITICAL AGENDA.
Bullshit all you want to wiggle around this definition, but it's true.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
Don't be fooled by Falun Gong. They hide behind their sham-of-a-religion to promote an overthrow of the current government. Their leader is a coward and a phony who should be dragged out and shot.
Let's hear it for President Jiang Zemin, everyone! Give him a big hand! Isn't he great?
During the American Revolution, there were two main elements fighting against the British.
First, there were the guerillas. Fire, run, attack, run, hide. That type of thing.
Second, there was "regular army". Regular army is an actual army - officers, training, disciple, uniforms, showing up for battles, etc.
The guerillas were terrorists, the Continental Army were not.
That's funny, the continental army, commanded by George Washington himself, used the tactics you just described. Hit and run. He knew he could never face the British in a regular fight. It's amazing we won the revolution at all... Oh wait, the French were helping us.
You need to read Stratfor, and maybe some Foreign Affairs magazine.
Fulan Gong originally had no political aspirations at all. Mostly just a self help group drawing on an odd collection of Chinese cultural traditions.
But then the communist gov't decided there were too many of them (and a huge number of them were party officials themselves) and decided to repress them.
All attempts to change the opinion of the Chinese gov't have failed, leaving the multitudes of followers with a choice:
1. Disappear
2. Foster regime change
Since most members were part of the emerging middle class it is not surprising to see the kind of sophisticated hacking taking place. At least one hacking team has been caught and disappeared into the Chinese prison system. Which just shows that this group is far more sophisticated and robust than any had thought. They must have several teams out there. They are not just hacking satellites either- but also hijacking cables.
Most of the attacks have taken place in North Eastern China- The Rust Belt of China. This area has the highest unemployment of the Nation, and has seen many demonstrations against the Gov't in the past several years. Again, this shows the sophistication of the group's planners and reveals their goal: change the gov't to one that will allow for freedom of expression and religion.
As for comments by people calling them zealots and criminals, I'd take this lot over the lot of Zealots and criminals that has been running China for the past 50+ years any day!
China is a great place (lived in Taiwan and Asia for 5 years), but the communists have done tremendous damage to Chinese culture (most notably during the Cultural Revolution)
Does that help you understand?
"The human rights and democracy centre said an antenna with a diameter of 3m could disrupt reception for hundreds of kilometres." "
That's ok, a Pringles can is all I need.. to take over the world!
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
Gee, what are they going to do? Ban them and then torture them in jail?
Comparing them to Al-Qaeda is ridiculous.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
There's the difference. The American colonists didn't specifically target civilians, the Palestinians go after mainly civilians.
China? What?
Valid military attacks carried out by terror groups, IMO. You make a good point.
Common criminals are known to threaten or kill police officers. Your local military force is designed to threaten or kill enemy military forces, and definitely threatens vital enemy infrastructure like power stations and dams.
I had the implicit assumption that we all recognize standard inter-State warfare and non-organized crime as exactly that, and therefore not terrorism.
Moreover, directly attacking civilian populations is something that was done regularly as late as WWII, even by the Allies. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not entirely military targets.
One can argue back and forth on this, which I won't bother to do here - it's ultimately pointless, as both sides have valid arguments. However, I will note that the Geneva Convention, which postdates World War II, attempts to limit or prohibit the practice of targeting civilian populations.
I'm suggesting that perhaps your criteria for determining who they are need to be tightened somewhat.
In letter, sure, but I think the spirit was there. And I still don't think Falun Gong qualifies ;)
Well, you have to admit this does have other possibilities. Perhaps Chuck Barris should be contacted to see if he'd like to host the Falun Gong Show...
(I wonder if I'm going to lose karma points for that one...)
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The chinese openly admit to censorship, restrictions on individual rights, etc.
Here in the US, we are every bit as much a police state as china is, however we claim to be the freest place on earth. (richest sure, but the freedom is an illusion)
Here we curtail civil liberties in "defense of freedom". Here we have a working massive fingerprint database, and a credit database that says if you are a good person or not, which furthermore you cannot argue against.
Our government has huge monitoring systems which silently listen to communications all over the world combing for information.
We have a War department that is called "The Dept. of Defense" which has been waging nearly perpetual war for 50 years across the globe.
We have huge witchhunts for the enemy of the day "communists" "child molesters" "terrorists".
The scariest thing is that it all arises without rigid central control: we censor ourselves to further our careers.
The doublethink in the USA is getting pretty scary.
I doubt this was a computer hack, just a RF hack.
I am assuming that the Chinese are using a simple analog transmission over the transponder without any CA (conditional access/security).
If you have a big enough dish and enough power, you could get the transponder to lock to your carrier and get rebroadcast. The picture would look crappy, but it can be done.
There's no great defense against it other than implementing a secured digital transmission system where the IRDs (integrated receiver/demodualtors) do not have analog reception capability.
All the Falun Gong needed was an Earth Station anywhere in Asia that could see the bird and was willing to transmit. I doubt it was done from inside China. They'd know where all the 5+ meter dishes are in China and who was working them.
Information warfare of this type has a bit of a financial barrier to overcome to engage in, but once on the offensive, it is quite tough to defend against. The Soviet Union and Cuba were unable to stop the US radio and TV propaganda broadcasts throughout the cold war, no matter how much they spent.
nuclear iraq bioweapon encryption cocaine korea terrorist
Fa = Rules, methods, ways
Lun = a wheel.
Gong = a closest term in English is 'breathing excise', this is exactly the same word 'kung' as in the popular term 'Kungfu'. Of course, Gong always refer to prolong practice which will eventually lead to ultima goal of getting harmony with the Universe. Some people would consider practising 'Gong' as a method of making themselves stronger, to fight better, etc.. In fact, there are a lots of different 'Gong' in Chinese's history.
I'm not a memeber of Fa Lun Gong, and I really not in position to speak for them, but to my best of the knowledge, their 'Gong' is strongly related to religion as the 'FaLun' is an equipment being used by the monks of Buddhism. The 'FaLun', in buddhism, is a symbol of the Universe.
FaLun Gong, thus, is a 'Gong' to practise in order to build a 'FaLun' within your own body.
Their theory seems so unrealistic to me.
USA PATRIOT defines domestic terrorism as activities that attempt "to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion".
Dictionary.com defines "coerce" thus: By that definition, Falun Gong are terrorists. So are all of us that marched on federal buildings attempting to use "pressure" to "compel" the DOJ to free Dmitry. Which serves as a good example of one of the many things that are wrong with USA PATRIOT.
Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the terrorist party?
ehintz
Who are NON-COMBATATANTS?
If you support and financially aid the armed combatants, you're a combatant. Be that those who send funds and support to Bin Laden, or those who elect their government and pay their taxes. At the very least, you would have to admit that you're part of the system making the combat possible.
We, during WW2 attacked civilian centers to get at the military machine, and also to drain support for the war effort. What's so different about attacking the WTC? (Not that I condone it...but it is "logical" behavior, provided you want to attack the system that props up the US Gvmt - thereby attacking the system that props up Israel, thereby attacking the system that opresses the Palastinians...)
Unfortunatly, even though I disagree with some of the actions of my Gvmt, I do consider myself an indirect target for those who find our actions wrong. That's always the way it is. We just convienently call it TERRORISM when it happens to us, and call it "PROTECTING OUR INTERESTS" when we do it to others. (Or better yet, claim they were terrorists who acidentally blew themselves up etc...)
Any conflict is about frightning your opposition into submission. Attacking civilians is a tack taken by those who (generally) have less power and might. Just let the US end up in a battle they're in danger of loosing, or are way outmatched, and you'ld see us do the same. We (I'm a US citizen!) have a Gvmt that isn't any morally better than Bin Laden. (perhaps that's too strong - but we certainly don't have the moral highground) Our deeds right now appear to be better, but the motivation behind them isn't much different. It's just that we have the power luxery(sp) to act "better." Trade places with Bin Laden in terms of raw power, and we'd be attacking civillians too, in order to win "for good over evil..."
I suppose that all countries have this blind spot, but I hoped and wish that we were different.
When the Chineese hold someone (their citizen or not) without charge, and use military trials, limit access to counsel, and the media, and public scrutiny, we say it's a sham trial.
When we do it, it's to protect the safety of Americans. By the way, they're both wrong by ANY standard. If we can't live by the rules of, access to counsel, open trials, guilty until proven innocent, the right to confront your accusers, the right not to testify against yourself, the right to a grand-jury, the right to afore mentioned items before taking away our freedom - we ought to just call ourselves a dictatorship, and do away with the facade of justice.
Examine the heart of your country - it's more rotten than you imagine. (I'm not claiming that your heart is rotten, you probably are of high moral standing) It's just that we view our actions in a light that's very favorable to us. If you were an Afgani(sp), you'd see things differently. Like, perhaps Afganistan wouldn't be in such a prediciment(sp) if we hadn't armed lots of whacky groups, just to hassle or defeat the Russians, and then left them to stew in the juices when we were "through" with the Russians.
On a side note, who put Panama/Manuel Noriega, Iran's Shaw (70's & 80's), Iraq/Saddam Hussain, the Sandinistas, Phillipines/Marcos, Afganistan/Freedom Fighters, etc in power and supported them? Who supplied some or all of their military power/hardware? Who trained their goon squads? (Who in many cases, targeted civillians and didn't just kill them, but activly tortured them?) Who knew about and documented their abuses (via the CIA and other agencies) and mostly ignored them because we felt we needed their "support" more than their honor? Could it have been the "honorable" USA?
Look in the mirror...it's us (us citizens) that have allowed our Gvmt to committ such offenses - with our backing (taxes/investment) and votes. When some of that bad-will comes back to roost, it seems wrong to complain that we are somehow different. I don't suggest that you/we should like it, but perhaps we should expect it.
Stand up, and call a spade a spade. If it's wrong to attack innocent people, it's ALWAYS wrong. It's wrong for the US and it's wrong for everyone else too.
If due process is the best judicial system, and the most fair, it should apply to all - citizens, non-citizens, terrorists, and just plain old people, good or bad.
The standard doesn't change based on who you are, or which side you support. Freedom loving US'ians don't get a break from the rules simply because "we're the land of the 'free'." Terrorists don't loose some of their rights to justice and due process simply because they're terrorists! (Mind you that they haven't even been convicted of anything yet - so how do we call them terrorists?!)
Draw up your "standard" and apply it fairly and evenly to all. You'll find that the US isn't nearly the sainted freedom loving country we make ourselves out to be. That said, I'm not sure I know of a better system, than ours. But we can, should, and MUST do better. We must treat others the way we want and expect to be treated.
Cheers!
Sounds like somebody from the Blue Cube, the USAF Satellite Control Center in Sunnyvale, CA. That place had the Technology that Put Men On the Moon, the same Philco green-screen consoles that NASA Houston used for Apollo. The computers were UNIVAC and Control Data mainframes from the same period. That old gear was used into the 1990s. The upgrade project in the 1980s ("let's put it all on an IBM mainframe") didn't work, but finally, in the 1990s, control was moved to UNIX boxes and to a USAF base elsewhere.
I can't believe my inane diatribes make it to +5 and this just has one mod.
Please, I volunteer, return my +2 to the karma pool and raise this comment high
for all to see.
So do we--you've heard of the Constitution and the bill of rights, no? In the interest of protecting individual rights and freedoms, we repress other individual rights. Freedom is no illusion, it is a careful, careful balance. The difference is that I can go to court and challenge _any_ law that I perceive to be too restrictive, and I can win! It happens every day. Some might argue that the system's out of whack right now, but...
scariest thing is that it all arises without rigid central control
Exactly! It's brilliant! We control the extent to which our freedoms are suppressed, sometimes in the interest of safety, sometimes because of FUD, but always because we have chosen. And no doubt, the pendulum swings a little extreme one way, we see the error of our ways, and it swings back too far the other way. It's just human nature.
waging nearly perpetual war for 50 years
Rome went to war much longer--was it a police state? So did Britain--police state? You digress here, methinks.
BTW, I've been to some peaceful demonstrations, in our nation's capital and other places, and no tanks and soldiers have ever shown up, shot large numbers of peaceful demonstrators, and covered the numbers up. That kind of thing just can't happen here; part of the beauty of our system is that horrible things like Kent State can happen and be displayed by the media, to become a forum for the public to discuss for the next hundred years. How did the public discussion go in the People's Republic after that little incident in the Square? There are some bad trends in the US right now, but I do NOT think you can draw similarities between the States and China.
so then if I commit armed robbery I can be tried by a military tribunal instead of a jury of my peers? I sure hope you don't end up in charge someday.
What?
Considering Falun Gong's trouble with the chinese government this is a very stupid move as it gives the government more arguments in attacking and arresting Falun Gong members.
This is a valid point. Except that the government doesn't need any more "arguments" they ARE attacking and arresting Fulan Gong members. At this point Fulan Gong's options are to surrender/recant or counterattack. Fulan Gong has decided to attack (You are right this WAS a direct attack), attempting to undermine the government and agitate for reform or a change of regime. Whether it is "stupid" or not really depends on how important their beliefs are to them (which is subjective) and on their likelyhood of success (which is hard to know).
In FG's favor totalitarian dictatorships are powerful BUT also brittle, if FG can use these propoganda stunts to undermine the populaces confidence in, and loyalty too, the government they have a decent chance of success. The tienanmen square student protests had to be put down by troops from remote regions ignorant (aside from government propoganda) of the protests nature and it's goals. They did this because the government feared the local, more informed and sympathetic troops, might not prove loyal. Even so there was some indication that the government feared opposition from some military units - remember the footage of TANK BARRIERS at major intersections. (rather useless against pedestrian protestors). Remember also the troops in Romania just a few years before who not only refused to fire on a similar protest but joined the protesters and toppled the government.
By broadcasting their protest throughout the provinces Fulan Gong may create a situation where the government has NO troops whose loyalty is assured by their ignorance.
Banner advertising is _SO_ 2000.
(-:
S
By that defenition, the self bombing palestenians who are resisting the
israeli occupation are NOT terrorists but freedom fighters.
One thing the palestinians certainly are NOT fighting for is "freedom". They are attacking the most free nation in the middle east, on behalf of a corrupt Palestinian would-be dictator. They are egged on by the various arab dictators and kings, who need a distraction from their own shortcomings. You can call them "revolutionaries", or even "resistance", but they are not freedom fighters.
And there is a very big difference between dumping tea in the harbor or hacking communication systems, on the one hand, and blowing up children on the other.
Of course - because it is an act in support of a known terrorist organization. A useful parallel would be cracking down on Al Qaeda's finance - gathering money isn't terrorism, but since it is used to enact terrorism, it's terrorism.
On the other hand, beaming "Slashdot RULZ" onto CNN/ETC/FOX would not be terrorism, but simple crime. You'd have the gov't on your ass, but probably not the 'with extreme prejudice' crowd.
A really interesting border case would be Hamas. Aside strapping bombs to people and sending them into crowds, they have a social services arm that does as much or more for the populace as the Palestinian Authority, which is one of the reasons their support among the people is so high. Does that make social services terrorism? If it includes education of youth to support and enact terrorism, then arguably yes. But even if they didn't, they would still be labeled a terrorist organization because of their other activities.
It's often been said that "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter".
However *intentional* attacks on civilians with no military purpose other than killing civilians are war crimes by any normal standards. Of course the winning side in a way normally decided who gets charged with war crimes.
notice that china's changed since mao was around. yes. millions died because of poor political practices. but they've managed to get a good rate of growth in openness balanced with population and agricultural control.
wait 20 years. it will be a different nation. wait 50 and it will be the most free nation in the world. mark my words.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Apparently, you think it's bad. Go ahead and say so in China. You just said so in that awful police state America. Or are you only a brave fighter for liberty when you know that nothing's at stake and your complaint is a hollow one?
The type of extreme reaction provoked from you demonstrates very well the self-censorship im talking about:
What self-censorship? I don't think the US is a police state, or even close to a police state. You, on the other hand, do think so, and just said so on a server hosted in the US. Has the government stopped you from saying so? No. Ergo, not censored by the US government. Amazing, that in the US there's not only no self-censorship, there's no government censorship, either. You're just another crank who hates America for some ill-defined reason.
Veiled threat, or subconscious slip?
See, now I think you're a troll. Because I am clearly referring to what will happen when you are oh-so-brave and protest that China is a police state when you are actually in China.
The only thing I'm threatening is the brainwashing that you've obviously received. Unfortunately, I don't think I'm able to crack through it.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
What were the settlers doing there in territory that Israel doesn't rightly own anyway? To me, the settlers in the occupied territories are the only valid civilian targets for the Palestinians.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
There is a big difference between china and america. i don't kid myself -- china's no free state. but i agree with that. they need it to keep their people alive. (read some of my other comments if you want to see a more lengthy explaination)
but i've felt the oppression of american society. but that's to a lesser extent then some feel it. like the brave soul who contested the "under god" part of the pledge.
he got death treats.
i think it speaks volumes.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
oh yeah.... and if you're arab and you criticize the american public... say hey to your new title: enemy combatant.
.they just restrict what's avaliable publically :))
extrapolate? Will I (irish american) be included in the future?
and i believe it's our FBI who's trying to get the records of what I buy from barnes and nobel. (the chinese government doesn't monitor what you buy..
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
What's wrong with self-censorship? I censor all sorts of things from my life all the time. I don't listen to NSYNC. I don't read astrology books. I don't listen to scientologists. I don't pay attention to the next version of Windows; etc.
You only start to have problems when other people censor you. Sometimes it's justified by societal norms (eg, Nazi paraphanelia in France, "hate speech" in the Netherlands, vulgarity in school), sometimes it's justified for security's sake (death threats, shouting 'fire' in a theatre). And, yes, sometimes it is completely unjustified (DMCA/WIPO laws) and needs to be changed. The difference between China and the west (including the USA) is the degree to which these things happen. People who equate censorship in China with censorship in the west really come off as ignorant because there is a magnitude of difference there.
On the other hand, I don't mean this as a "yay, the west is perfect" posting either; we need to be viligant and stop injustices where possible. The /. crowd has done an admiral job of doing just that WRT the DMCA (or the WIPO dejour of your country, if you don't live in the USA). But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater -- life with liberty and freedom is something we should strive for everywhere, and celebrate where it does exist.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
Channel Zero by Brian Wood is a great graphic novel that has a subplot similar to this.. Just change the setting to NYC under Giuliani, and the Falun Gong to a totally disaffected super-hacker-chic trying to wake-up the general populace to the insanity and brutality of the city government.
The recent political philosophy work "Empire" by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri cites this condition as a hallmark of the new world order of Empire, centered of course in America, but nonetheless active in all sovereign governments working by or towards the power of capitalism. In the long run, China probably qualifies here.
Note their characterization, and how it compares to the Falun Gong and to Channel Zero:
"[These events] are educational lessons in the classroom of administration and the chambers of government -- lessons that demand repressive instruments. The primary lesson is that such events cannot be repeated if the processes of capitalist globalization are to continue. These struggles, however, have their own weight, their own specific intensity, and moreover they are immanent to the procedures and developments of imperial power. They invest and sustain the process of globalization themselves. Imperial power whispers the names of the struggles in order to charm them into passivity, to construct a mystified image of them [e.g. slashdot], but most important to discover which processes of globalization are possible and which are not. In this contradictory and paradoxical way the imperial processes of globalization assume these events, recognizing them as both limits and opportunities to recalibrate Empire's own instruments. The processes of globalization would not exist or whould come to a halt if they were not continually both frustrated and driven by these explosions of the multitude that touch immediately on the highest levels of imperial power." [Empire, Pp. 59]
As for the death threats that the guy in Sacramento got, you're right, it does speak volumes. There are nearly 300 million Americans. If 99.99% of them were completely sane people, understanding and accepting of other points of view, there would still be 3,000 people who would want to kill him. How many death threats did he get? I bet it's less than 3,000, and there are a lot more crazy, intollerant people in the US than my absurdly generous estimate above.
What's more important to note is that no GOVERNMENT figure issued a death threat, despite the fact that you couldn't find a public figure who agreed with this guy.
So yeah, the fact that one guy in Sacramento can get judges to agree to remove God from a patriotic pledge during a time of war does speak volumes about the US. It says "America is still the land of the free."
-jon
Remember Amalek.
well... they've had 14 year olds set themselves on fire... i don't know if that counts.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
it also speaks volumes that the guy, and the judges, got SO much criticism that the removal got stayed...
as for china -- if they had some open, free gov't it would become like china of the warload era. or of the era where europe played them like pawns and many died. now, with the population, many millions more would die.
like argentina. we prop em' up then refuse to help when "democracy" fails to help them...
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
And if you are an Irish American who is scheming to help terrorists kill Americans and destroy America, then I hope you are locked up as an enemy combatant. If you're not, then you won't be.
The FBI has tried to get records of book purchases. Book stores said no. Guess what happened to the book seller? Nothing. In fact, the courts have told the FBI they can't get those records. America, land of the free, wins again.
But please keep trying. You are making it very easy for me to prove my point.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
Self-Censorship is NOT avoiding things you dislike (in this context at least), what I mean is when you decline to say what you mean and when you dont stand up for what you really believe in and succumb to the groupthink around you.
Reasons for doing this are fear (will they send you death threats, are they watching me?) and prudence (if I dont go along with everyone else then it will hurt my chances for social advancement.) Even worse is when you speculatively promulgate a viewpoint that you dont really support.
Unofficial reprisals tend to be just as intimidating and effective as official ones.
Being able to talk about these phenomena without being ostracized is the first step towards fixing them.
Well, what about other religious beliefs? Jehovah's Witnesses consider pledging aliegance in general to be against their religion. Should the pledge be banned in its entirely because it offends them? And while I don't want to draw a parallel between atheism and bigotry, how about people who don't believe in "Liberty and Justice for all"? Like white supremicists or people who want to keep women uneducated, barefoot, and pregnant? Can we pull that clause as well because we might be teaching tolerance to the children of bigots? Sorry, but it's a stupid decision from a court that has a history of stupid decisions. 84% of the rulings in the 9th Circuit get overturned, many of them unanamously.
But the important thing is that this discussion doesn't happen at the point of a gun. It happens in court rooms, in public. That's why the US isn't a police state.
As for your other comments, look, it's clear that you believe that the Chinese are stupid sub-humans who are incapable of taking care of themselves unless they have an opressive government. I think they're human beings who should be free, like Americans. Let's just say we agree to disagree.
And Argentina didn't have a failing of democracy, it had a failing of bad economic policy. But you probably don't want to discuss that here and I don't know if you have the background to debate it cogently.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
But it seems that it is not the case; palestinians are denied citizenship by the fact that they aren't jewish.
Therefore, the state of israel is a racist state, and should be brought down with the same zeal that the south-african racist state was brought down.
Sorry? Oh, true, it can't happen, as the jews have an iron grip over american public opinion by their control of the mass-medias...
Setting 14 year olds on fire: terrorism.
Having 14 year olds set themselves on fire: cult.
Alternately, some self-immolation is considered by some a legitimate form of protest, usually one associated with religion.
i can't give you a link... but after 9/11 hundreds of arabs were put in prison -- without charge.
jose is in prison -- without charge
and if i want to advocate killing americans, that's my right. i'm no enemy combatant until you can prove that i'm an enemy combatant.
until then, you can't take away my freedoms.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Bill Maher makes joke about 9/11 tero's, result: show canceled.
Judges rule pledge unconstitutional, result: recieve death threat while congress recites socialistesque pledge upon capitol steps. (they seemed disingenuine at best)
Some big news channel owner notes that the jews are killing more palestinians than vice-versa, result was scandal+ near removal of the channel from some places etc...
things like that, pretty common really.
And of course you have the right to advocate killing Americans. Just don't complain when someone advocates killing you. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...
-jon
Remember Amalek.
I don't disagree with your points. However, I have come to the conclusion that there are really two kinds of freedom.
The first kind of freedom is what we have in the USA. It is the freedom of the majority to be able to change things when the majority is dissatisfied. The American colonies didn't have that under british rule.
The second kind of freedom is personal freedom which we no longer have (or maybe never really had) in the USA. This is the freedom to do whatever I want as long as it hurts no one. For example, prostitution hurts no one, but is illegal in the USA except in rural nevada. Gambling used to be illegal most places (because it was morally wrong), then the majority of americans decided it was morally okay and now we have it just about everywhere. The war on drugs is really a war against a minority of US citizens and has more in comon with a "war on high prices" than a real war.
Freedom of religion? You have the freedom to practice some religions, but not others. For example, if you are a mormon and part of your religion involves polygamy, you are forbidden from practicing it. Why? Only because the majority of americans are against it for no reason that is obvious to me.
Alcohol used to be illegal because it was "morally wrong". Now it is okay. (I guess God changed his mind.)
Slavery used to be legal. Jim Crow used to be legal. Jim Crow only changed because the majority changed their minds. Slavery was only outlawed because the civil war was going on so the south didn't get to vote on it.
If you are an atheist, you are basically demonized by the majority and by the current government. I can't turn around without some bozo telling me about Jesus. (Guess what, I have heard your stupid ideas already - get a clue.)
There was a time when there was "voluntary" prayer in school. My father was severely beaten regularly after school for not participating in this "voluntary" prayer.
That's all Christians are - a gang of thugs who will use whatever violent, branwashing techniques they can to further their idiotic ideas.
I would be for respecting their freedom if they would respect mine, but they won't and they never will. That's why we must use any means necessary to fight christianity - the enemy of thinking people.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Surely, if the jews had such a great democracy, the benefits of citizenship would be extended to all those palestinians living in the occupied territories, no? The palestiniants would be able to vote at elections and have a number of representatives at the Knesset, no? [snip] palestinians are denied citizenship by the fact that they aren't jewish.
No, Palestinians are denied citizenship by the fact that they (or their parents or grandparents) left Israel/Palestine in 1948 to join the arab armies that were going to push the jews into the sea and steal all their property. (Meaning for the most part, land the arabs had valued at virtually nothing until the jews bought it and built it up.) The arabs lost. The Israelis refused to let people who had intended to murder them back in. Sounds pretty sensible to me...
That these murderous losers and three generations of their descendants are still living in refugee camps on the fringes of Israel is quite unfortunate, but it's not the Israeli's fault - unless you blame them for surviving, or for still refusing to let a horde of would-be murderers cross the border. Note that even the name "palestinians" seems to be a relic of the camps - there never was a nation of Palestine, and no any arab or muslim nation ever had a capital within that area. So "Palestinian" is an artificial nationality conceived by the leaders of other arab nations who would rather keep them in festering camps than let them enter their countries. (Jordan and Lebanon were exceptions that did eventually let some Palestinians in - but they made so much trouble in Jordan that King Hussein's army eventually had to drive them out, and they contributed to the near destruction of Lebanon.)
If the jews were half as murderously racist as the arabs, there would be no Palestinian problem - because there would be no more Palestinians. And if the other arab nations had been half as generous towards the displaced arabs as modern christians and jews often are towards even people of different appearance and religion, there would also be no Palestinians, since they would now be Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis, Saudis, etc.
Now, if you have a way in which the Israelis could welcome in thousands of people who want to murder them without comitting suicide, why don't you let the world know? It ought to be worth a Nobel Peace Prize.
Not in America, they weren't (as much as you'd gleefully love that assertion to be true, no doubt)
jose is in prison -- without chargeWell, you've spent one of your two cases in that statement. Yes, he is in prison without charges, and you can rest assured that it'll be remedied soon either through derision for Ashcroft or formal charges. Now, how many Chinese are in prison for political "dissidence"? How many are just dead for the same thing, without even taking up arms against their country?
if i want to advocate killing americans, that's my right. i'm no enemy combatant until you can prove that i'm an enemy combatant.Actually, advocating murder can be a criminal offense if it's specific enough...
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
Wasn't the Republican Party founded with the objective of coercing the policy of the southern states in the USA to abolish slavery?
Your own quote says "To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation."
Where in delivering a unilateral, broadcast, and undirected message do you find pressure, threats, or intimidation?
To claim that this is terrorism is just more WTC "terrorism everywhere" inflation hysteria. We need the word to mean what it means, and you ain't helping.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june0 2/dragnet_4-3.html
i didn't have a link because i was on my way out.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
Hacking was beginning.
What happen?
Someone set up us the uplink!
We get signal!
What?
Main screen turn on!
How are you gentlemen.
All your comsat are belong to us.
This concludes the 9,238,973rd reiteration of Zero Wing, though perhaps if the banner repeated "All Your Comsat Are Belong To Us!" on every network, it would have been much, MUCH funnier...
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
keep meeting some falungong members.
a lu n15.html
as for the qigong "creation." i got that off of a flyer i got on falundafa (their other name) when i was seeing the sites in D.C.
(sorry, i no longer have it... that was years ago)
if they just wanted to practice their spirituality, why did their leader stage a protest before they were being watched like dogs?
http://www.rickross.com/reference/fa_lun_gong/f
as for the self-imolation... you can believe it is a chinese fabrication. i happen to think your idea is a falungong fabrication. i'd say neither is below such things. but you tell me to KNOW my facts. the truth is that neither of us KNOW the truth. we just have our prefered opinions.
i've lived in china though. the falungong members i met there were peaceful, for the most part. they were critical of the chinese gov't, but a lot of chinese are.
the falungong members i've met here are not so peaceful. that's why i see it as manipulative. they get these people to protest for their own (US based) reasons. that's not cool in my book.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
> Using crime to make yourself heard makes one a "terrorist", as per U.S tradition
Unless those crimes are commited against the British Crown. Then you get to celebrate the crimes anually with fireworks displays... right?
Perhaps though, this is what you mean by "U.S. tradition".
You seem to be rather confused about the difference between terrorists, protestors and revolutionaries.
Terrorists are people who attack innocent civilians with the intent and methods of terror, with the goal of coercing desired behavior.
Thus, Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists; Al Queda's attacks against the WTC are terrorist attacks. Al Queda's attack against the USS Cole was NOT a terrorist attack ( it was a military attack ), the bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon was NOT a terrorist attack. Israeli army occupation of Palestinian sites, and their attacks on Palestinian terrorists, are not terrorist actions. Palestinian attacks on Israeli military occupiers are not terrorist attacks (they are revolutionary attacks).
Does that help?
Lets not let the word "terrorism" get as watered down and meaningless as the word "genocide."
The only good weather is bad weather.
The problem is not the lack of a clear-cut definition of terrorism. The problem is yourself and others who broadcast their ignorance of the definition.
Oh, btw, hijacking a satellite channel isn't terrorism - it doesn't terrorize anyone! It may be vandalism, it may be revolutionary, it may be theft, but it ain't terrorism.
And blowing up children with a bomb is not revolution - it is terrorism.
And our revolutionary soldiers, in general, were revolutionarys, not terrorists, because they fought against military forces, not civilians.
The only good weather is bad weather.
Thank you for demonstrating your lucid thought processes and love for mankind...