Slashdot Mirror


Videogame Character Threatens National Security?

Watchful Babbler writes "Apparently, 'the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix one day last April' was clear and definite: a reclusive millionaire had formed a terrorist group with the intent of launching chemical weapons attacks on Western cities. The White House was notified and the Director of the FBI briefed as the government raced to find information. But then, according to USNews.com, a White House staffer decided to Google for information on suspected threat Don Emilio Fulci and found him -- in a video game - Sega's action title Headhunter. No word on exactly which sources and methods came up with this gem, but word in the E Ring is that Fulci had issued the cryptic warning, 'You have no chance to survive make your time'."

396 comments

  1. Hmmm by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sounds like the government was trolled.

    1. Re:Hmmm by Bobdoer · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, do you think they'd fall for the Goaste link? Or would they be more susceptible to Tubgirl?

    2. Re:Hmmm by Frymaster · · Score: 3, Funny

      -1 national security threat

    3. Re:Hmmm by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

      IN OTHER NEWS:
      All Your Base Are Belong To Us!

    4. Re:Hmmm by mfh · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Sounds like the government was trolled.
      By Sega, no less!

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    5. Re:Hmmm by Bobdoer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      With their history of it, I can't say I'm surprised.

    6. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course, the Goatse Guy *is* in fact a threat to National Security. He is clearly demonstrating a viable way to smuggle WMD's across the border.

    7. Re:Hmmm by jacumba · · Score: 2, Funny

      He was going to attack using his diabolical new weapon which could make DiHydrogen Monoxide fall from the sky!

    8. Re:Hmmm by DavidBrown · · Score: 2, Funny

      So, do you think they'd fall for the Goaste link? Or would they be more susceptible to Tubgirl?

      I think that Goatse was implicated in the recent Iraqi prisoner mistreatment scandal.

      --
      144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
    9. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Obviously this is equivalent to fighting mp3 downloads by filling p2p networks with fake songs; a form of steganography. The real-life reclusive millionare, Mr. Don Emilio Fulci, has simply asked his fellow conspirators at Sony to make a video game of his terrorist plans. Now he can conduct his planning in the open, and everyone will think that the web pages on which he is plotting the atrocities he's bound to commit and recruiting bored geeks to his terrorist cells, calling them 'clans', are simply innocent, game-related fan sites.

    10. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What causes these blackouts that you have?

      Something that happened during the first time I played NFL 2K4 (now called ESPN NFL Football) caused them, although I haven't been able to figure out what, exactly. I played this game one time and immediately after began having violent episodes where I behave like a football player. I have been playing video games practically my whole life, and have never had any ill effects from any video game before this. I also know the game caused them because Beta-13 and Beta-5 have both had them, and the only thing all three of us have in common is that we all beta tested the game on March 22."

      Astounding. Sweet trollage.

    11. Re:Hmmm by m0rphin3 · · Score: 1

      The whole beta-7 concept is pretty interesting, and won Haxan (the makers of Blair Witch) an award.

      This might be something similar.

      --
      for great justice
    12. Re:Hmmm by AEton · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Slightly offtopic but coincides with this thread: that was (as we could guess) a hoax. Ix-nay on the +4 formative-innay.
      Viral marketing like the "Beta-7.com" campaign is SO FSCKING ANNOYING.
      You can picture these balding, gray-suited marketing executives sitting around the Table of the Round going "hey! having an Internet site about our product will make people buy it!". In fact all they manage to do is remind us that nothing you read on the Interweb is trustworthy - which is a fine postmodernist lesson - but I don't appreciate being treated as a commodity.
      Like the /. sig says, we're citizens, not consumers, and I'm a little disappointed that people would reward such a company for finely polished attempts at mind control like the ones it satirized by buying into their product.

      --
      We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
    13. Re:Hmmm by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    14. Re:Hmmm by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Find the subversive message:

      WELCO
      METOT
      HENEX
      TLEVEL
      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    15. Re:Hmmm by NineteenSixtyNine · · Score: 0

      Damn you. Ya finally got me curious enough to look at the tubgirl page. Over breakfast.

      --

      --
      What would Bill Clinton do?
    16. Re:Hmmm by wackysootroom · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't you mean weapons of *ass* destruction?

    17. Re:Hmmm by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Don't you mean weapons of *ass* destruction?

      No way, man. That ass was destroyed WAY before anyone thought of hiding weapons there.

  2. Notice how the date is in April? by foidulus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Could the world's most elaborate April fools be amiss?

    1. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Could it be that you are all being had? Did anyone here bother to cross-examine the validity of this story or do any research? I guess when Slashdotters take things on faith they *must* be right because, well, that's just how the world works. Facts are facts because they fulfill our wildest fantasies.

      *sigh*

    2. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by DJStealth · · Score: 4, Funny

      I once had a security officer in an Airport stop to ask me "Where is South Park" (I was wearing a South Park T-shirt with writing in Hebrew & English), trying not to laugh, I responded that its a TV show. He then proceeded to ask me to take off my shoes and checked me for explosives.

    3. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by DJStealth · · Score: 1

      Sorry, this is offtopic to the parent, I meant to reply to the sibling post below talking about "Mario getting sued"

    4. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      I once had a security officer in an Airport stop to ask me "Where is South Park" (I was wearing a South Park T-shirt with writing in Hebrew & English),

      Next time that happens, just say it's in Colorado and start telling him of the various things that have happened there, like Mecha-Streisand, or the time everyone turned into zombies, or when the world was revealed to be a giant reality TV show. That should shut him up.

    5. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by DJStealth · · Score: 1

      Next time, I'm not going to wear any t-shirts with non-english writing on it.

      I actually got searched twice at that airport (in Orlando, FL); this was in Aug 2002, so I wasn't too surprised to get searched; I just thought it was hillarious that a large security officer of 'colour' stopped me to ask me where is South Park.

    6. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there is only one black guy in South Park and he's a scientologist so probably doesn't count. Oh, I guess there is Token too. Either way, not much black awareness of south park.

    7. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Fairplay, Colorado.

      (South Park City)

      Matt Stone and Trey Parker lived there for a while, they based the town and some of the characters on people who lived there.

      (They also like South Park!)

    8. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by PenguiN42 · · Score: 1

      Chef is a scientologist?

      Man, I've missed too many episodes. /burn-karma

      --
      The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence was false.
    9. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      It isn't quite for funny with a simple substitution: Shoko Ashahara for Don Emilio Fulci.

      The Aum cult in Japan did manufacture chemical weapons and attacked subways in Japan. It killed a number of people and sickened thousands. They had their own research labs with university trained staff. It was no laughing matter. You can read more about it here.

    10. Re:Notice how the date is in April? by miller701 · · Score: 1

      Not as far as I know, but Isaac Hayes is.

  3. is it april 1st? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    too funny for reality.

  4. In other news by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Funny

    Government sues Mario. Nintendo execs in jail...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mario meets Bubba

    2. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the government doesnt due now a days.. They just take you to guantanamo bay

    3. Re:In other news by KeeperS · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not surprised. Mario is a communist, after all.

    4. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no the government wouldn't sue mario his promotion of mushrooms prompted mr. bush countless good times in his younger years

    5. Re:In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least we didn't leak that there were WMDs involved and declare war on Sega.

    6. Re:In other news by mog007 · · Score: 1

      Before the release of Mario Party 5, Nintendo started to release advertisements that claimed Mario was running for president.

    7. Re:In other news by Chalybeous · · Score: 2, Funny

      He wouldn't be the first fictional character to do so. If I were in the US, I'd be voting Cthulhu for President - after all, why settle for the lesser evil? ;-)

      --

      "It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." -- Zork

    8. Re:In other news by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      To bad Duke didn't win in 2000. Of he wanted to get Saddam, he wold have takne him oput personally without starting a world war.

    9. Re:In other news by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      [Note to self: learn to type]

      He wouldn't be the first fictional character to do so

      To bad Duke didn't win in 2000. If he wanted to get Saddam, for instance, he would have taken him out personally without starting a world war.

    10. Re:In other news by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      Only problem with the linked article is that they cite Super Marios Brothers as the first game with Mario. It was, as far as I remember, the third game with Mario and Luigi. Donkey Kong was the first, the original Mario Brothers was the second, and Super Mario Brothers was the third. Right? Wait, there was a Donkey Kong Junior, wasn't there? Oh, so that makes Super Mario Brothers the fourth game.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    11. Re:In other news by samhain_tm · · Score: 0

      You forgot Donkey Kong 3... with Mario's cousin Pete (or something like that)

      --
      I'm the root of all that's evil, yeah, but you can call me cookie.
    12. Re:In other news by Chalybeous · · Score: 1

      And if he'd've won, would he have insisted on going to Iraq anyway?

      (Nah, you're the man. Doonesbury rawks!)

      --

      "It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." -- Zork

  5. Amazing by DiscordOfFive · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow. At least we know their intel gathering stuff works.... It just can't tell reality from fantasy.

    --


    Only the purest of souls seek enlightenment. Everyone else just wants power.
    1. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wow. At least we know their intel gathering stuff works.... It just can't tell reality from fantasy.
      If they were using AMD instead they wouldn't have had that problem!
  6. Easy solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just recruit Mario Mario and his brother Luigi Mario. They're able to stop any trouble that comes their way.

    Oh, you may need to pardon them for their mushroom usage, but it's for a good cause.

    1. Re:Easy solution by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 0

      Oh, you may need to pardon them for their mushroom usage, but it's for a good cause

      You cant have a pair of drug abusing plumbers lead the war on terror and drugs

      --
      TIAEAE!
  7. Is it me.... by WarlockD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... or is terrorism winning?

    It certainly feels like evey time we get a false positive we panic.

    1. Re:Is it me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, it is, because of all the terror conveying statements made by our government/media.

      Wheres the flush lever?

    2. Re:Is it me.... by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      Who's "we"? I don't remember panicking about Fulci. It sounds like the only people reacting to this were FBI employees, and that's their job.

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    3. Re:Is it me.... by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The poster says the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix, in quotes as though he was quoting the article, which says no such thing.

      Keep in mind the nature of the source, sort of a tongue-in-cheek political gossip column as well.

      Some guy phoned in a tip, some low-level FBI grunt kicked it up the chain - as is his job. It was later found to be a hoax and thrown out. There was no panic or mayhem.

      This happens all the time, everyone from assholes to crazies phone in to report bad guys from movies, etc. I remember reading an article about the rash of calls law enforcement got after Silence of the Lambs came out - people actually thought Hannibal Lecter was a real guy.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:Is it me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your government is winning too. Having a series of perpetual wars against shadowy foes (drugs, terrorism, etc) allows them to divert taxpayer funds to their friends and supporters without difficult questions being asked. It's a win-win situation.

    5. Re:Is it me.... by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Okay, fair deal. You try being National Security Advisor for a day.

      It's their job to separate real threats from, well, fantasy threats. It always has, and they happened to suck it up one September day three years ago. Repeatedly, may I add.

      What's the alternative? Close your eyes and hope? Iraq or not, September 11 or not, there's always going to be someone that doesn't like America, and there will always be people shouting "1984" when the gov't decides to do something, and people holding pictures of loved ones killed by terrorists when the gov't doesn't prevent incidents.

      Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    6. Re:Is it me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrorism won a month after the planes hit, with the passage of the Patriot Act. More recent examples of extremists learning they can get their way include:

      - Italy: Italians were taken hostage in Iraq. Their captors gave Italy 5 days to stage anti-war protests, or the hostages would die. Italians staged a protest.

      - Spain: The train bombings resulted in the sitting government being unseated in the subsequent election.

      - United States: met with unexpected, fierce resistance that we could not put down without sending more equipment and troops. We reinstate the Republican Guard to patrol hotspots in Iraq. Keep in mind that these people were shooting at us during the invasion. Lesson learned: resist and the enemy will relent. Not only will they relent, they will appoint people that share the extremists' aim -- stopping the Americans.

      I had a mental list that was longer than this, but it escapes me right now.

      Terrorism/extremism won a long time ago.

    7. Re:Is it me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget when Gilligan's island first aired people were calling the coast guard wondering why they didn't go out and rescue those poor souls.

    8. Re:Is it me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The terrorists won the day Osama tricked his largest enemy (the US) into attacking his second largest enemy (Iraq).

    9. Re:Is it me.... by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1
      From the US News blurb, first line...
      It was the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix one day last April. Don Emilio Fulci described by an FBI tipster...
    10. Re:Is it me.... by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      Just live your life and tell the terrorists to go fuck themselves. We should just require all Americans take kung fu classes and carry big fat revolvers. Some assholes show up and start some shit we handle it the American way and kick their asses. All this 1984 crap is just a bad idea designed to keep us, as individuals, from having to take responsibility for ourselves. Yes, without all this spy game crap and taking away more and more of our freedoms we're open to attacks.. but even with all these steps we're barely, if at all, better protected. We're just proving that terrorism works by allowing these terrorists to impact our lives.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  8. Again an example... by j0keralpha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Of a very knee-jerk reaction to security here in the US... What I dont get is how Grade B (uncorroborated, domestic, single-informant) information winds up at the top of the threat matrix, unless someone was trying to play a joke?

    1. Re:Again an example... by jd · · Score: 1

      That ranks as high as Grade B? I'd fail it with an F!

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Again an example... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Again an example of the knee-jerk reaction of /. retards against the US. What I don't get is how you are so eager to believe a Grade B uncorroborated Washington rumor like this.

      Lets face it- the daily threat matrix is one of the most classified documents in the White House. It took weeks of negotiations for the 9/11 commission to see all of the documents that they wanted. Do you honestly think that some USA Today reporter somehow has an inside knowledge of what was in the document? Are you really that retarded?

    3. Re:Again an example... by corbettw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of a very knee-jerk reaction to security here in the US

      Knee-jerk in what way? I don't remember Fulci being placed at the top of the Most Wanted List. Was there an APB put out for him? Did Bush get in front of the microphones and say we had a new, greater, enemy in the war on terror? No, some nutjob phoned in a "tip", and after it went through various channels someone discovered it was a hoax. It happens all the time, nothing to see here, move along.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  9. I also hear... by decipher_saint · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...that the Princess has been captured again. Good thing Google is up to date on terrorist kidnappings too.

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
    1. Re:I also hear... by geekschmoe · · Score: 4, Funny

      sorry mario, but your terrorist leader is in another castle!

    2. Re:I also hear... by MisterFancypants · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry, Dubya, but the WMDs are in another bunker !!!!!

    3. Re:I also hear... by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Funny

      After what The Pentagon thought was successful military invasion to rescue that princess, they discovered what they thought was the woman and brought her out only to be told "Thank you GWB, but our princess is in another castle!"

    4. Re:I also hear... by Gareman · · Score: 1

      As everyone knows, our real enemy is the Brotherhood of Nod (BoN).

  10. CAPPS II by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder if he was added to the CAPPS II system as a "no fly" person.

    John.

  11. not released in the US by L-Train8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't think the Dreamcast game Headhunter was ever released in the US. You can find PAL versions on eBay, and some game websites have old stories on the game, (for example, gamespot.com), but the stories don't indicate a release date, or if the game ever actually came out. Only in Europe and Japan apparently, although the sequel, Headhunter: Redemption is slated for US release on PS2 and XBox

    --

    Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
    1. Re:not released in the US by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      It was released for PS2 in the US, IIRC.

      It came out after dreamcast ceased production, and like Shenmue II or Rez, Sega sold it off to be an exclusive in the US.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:not released in the US by Carlos+Rodriguez · · Score: 1

      It was released for the PS2 in the US in May 14, 2002.

    3. Re:not released in the US by Dimensio · · Score: 1

      It was released in the US, on the PS2, and its initial retail price was more than I paid to have the European Dreamcast version imported (note: Dreamcast games don't have PAL/NTSC distinctions, the video output is dependent on the console used).

    4. Re:not released in the US by shadowcabbit · · Score: 1

      As other replies mentioned, it was indeed ported the PS2 and released in the US.

      If you ask me, that was a terrorist act.

      --
      "Why Subscribe?" Good question...
    5. Re:not released in the US by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Some DC games will not display properly if you go between NTSC/PAL. This is mostly just the early ones. This is because NTSC and PAL video have different resolutions. Similarly, many games don't work in VGA mode, for the same reason. It (like NTSC and PAL) is considered to be a separate video mode.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:not released in the US by TechnoFreek · · Score: 1

      according to GameFAQs, Headhunter did have a US release. http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/dreamcast/data/322 51.html

    7. Re:not released in the US by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Oh great -- so he's a foreign terrorist! That will make catching him that much harder, especially with all you slashdotters whining about the government making mistakes. Let the government do its job already and let's get this foreign terrorist to Gitmo right away where he can wear a hood and be taunted by guards while the rest of us go back to enjoying the products of our Ministry of Truth.

  12. One day last april... by Sn_wC_t · · Score: 0, Redundant

    hmm, was it the first by chance?

  13. FBI Tipster revealed to be drunken frat boy by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Informative

    When asked for a name, he responded "I. P. Freely".

    This links comes from what amounts to a trashy "dc insider" gossip column. Though, this sort of stuff happens all the time. People phone in bogus tips all the time. If they sound legit, they get investigated.

    I also object to the articles description of Headhunter as "popular".

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    1. Re:FBI Tipster revealed to be drunken frat boy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      [T]his sort of stuff happens all the time. People phone in bogus tips all the time. If they sound legit, they get investigated.

      The problem is that this wasn't investigated before the heavy hitters were briefed. In other words, the govt went into QRC surge mode before evaluating the intelligence.

      All intel fed into the loop gets a two-step reliability rating composed of the source credibility and the probability of correctness. For example, intelligence rated at B-2 would translate to something like "generally reliable source, information probably correct in its major facts." What this story suggests is that unevaluated intel is getting fed to consumers.

      This is precisely what VPOTUS is getting flak for: Doug Feith's one-stop policy shops in the Pentagon were taking raw feeds from DIA, CIA, State, &c., and cherry-picking from them without doing source analyses. The result was what is now acknowledged as a terribly incorrect worldview that colored Administration thinking. (This is not to cast judgment upon such initiatives as the invasion of Iraq -- just an observation that the undergirding worldview of that invasion was 90-degrees off reality.)

      The /. editors heavily rewrote my submission. I would never have characterized any Dreamcast game as "popular."

      - Watchful Babbler

    2. Re:FBI Tipster revealed to be drunken frat boy by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      The FBI is used to dealing with such clearly-fake names. If a tipster doesn't want to reveal their true identity, but does want to leave some sort of name so that they can be recognized when they call back, they give such a "codename" and the FBI just nods and accepts it. To them, it's a notch better than having to write the tip off as being fully annonymous...

    3. Re:FBI Tipster revealed to be drunken frat boy by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Remember, after all, that a big player in the Watergate affairs was 'Deep Throat.'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  14. Jesus Fucking Christ. by James+A.+O.+Joyce · · Score: 1, Troll

    This isn't funny, for fuck's sake, this is downright worrying as hell. We're talking about the government with supposedly the most intelligence in possession of the most WMDs, the biggest army, the most firearms, the most money...and they start a level three alert over a goddamned video game character. I ain't gonna be sleeping easy tonight. Mod me down all you want, but this scares the living hell outta me.

    1. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This isn't funny, for fuck's sake, this is downright worrying as hell.

      Where's the option to filter out posts from late-model Slashdroids again?

      *sigh*

    2. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod me down all you want, but this scares the living hell outta me.

      No it doesn't. Who the fuck is scared by Slashdot articles? Half of Slashdot "news" is bad unverified or slanted crap anyway.

      I say you're karma-whoring like there's no tomorrow. Nothing better to be modded up than a "government's-gone-crazy-they're-all-after-us" post...

    3. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's that little button at the top of your screen with the X in it... If yer gonna bitch about what other people say at least say something yourself, bitching is *easy*...

    4. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      *points to GNAA link in parents signature*

    5. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by mt+v2.7 · · Score: 0, Troll

      There's a considerable difference between the "biggest" army and the Most Powerful one.. The army's undermanned right now..

    6. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Max+Threshold · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd be more afraid if the government weren't incompetent.

    7. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by gangien · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK they recieved a tip that certainly, if true would be extremely serious, so they took it seriously and this makes you paranoid? It's good to know that our government takes threats seriously until they can be proven not to be serious, as in this case. Makes you lose sleep? well it makes me sleep better.

    8. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Adriax · · Score: 1

      I'll have problems sleeping when these guys make the top of the threat matrix.

      Until then, I'm just gonna sleep normally, and wait for next year when the guy who started the chain-overreaction is out of office.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    9. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Holy cow. Calm down. What USA Today printed was a RUMOR- a rumor about a highly classified document. In reality, the story that made it to USA Today probably bears little resemblence to what actually happened in the White House.

      You have gone to level three tin-foil-hat alert over a silly rumor.

    10. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by niko9 · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of an old movie quote: "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

      --

    11. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do schizophrenic posts such as this get modded up? Oh thats right, because of such an insightful link in the parents sig.....

    12. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by razol · · Score: 3, Informative

      We're talking about the government with supposedly the most intelligence in possession of the most WMDs, the biggest army

      I believe that Russia is actually the country documented with the most WMD, their biological reserves are quite vast.

      I do not think the US Army is the largest, it was China the last time I checked.

      they start a level three alert over a goddamned video game character

      Level three alert? I must have missed this important distinction. Further, how do we even know this is true? Looking at the other stories on this web site carrying the story makes you wonder how much of it is just sensational BS.

    13. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's US News & World Report.

      (A distinction which is on the level of contrasting the National Enquirer to the Sun... or perhaps Fox News?)

    14. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by corbettw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      +1, Ironic. You claim the government is overreacting by shouting in hysterics because someone phoned in a hoax tip which was subsequently proven to be a hoax and dropped. Go outside, take a breath of fresh air, and relax for pity's sake.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    15. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      We're talking about the government with supposedly the most intelligence in possession of the most WMDs, the biggest army, the most firearms, the most money...and they start a level three alert over a goddamned video game character.

      I don't find this troubling at all. Intelligence is basicly about as accurate as reading tea leaves. I don't mean this as a flame, but rather then an accurate assessment of trying to predict the actions of other people. I've seen how true gamers really emerge themselves in a character and how they can describe their actions in a game in the first person. Someone in intelligence overhearing part of a conversation only hearing, "reclusive millionaire had formed a terrorist group with the intent of launching chemical weapons attacks on Western cities" would very at the very least research the issue. Who knows, while it's just a video game it could be based on real events or real people. While I'll agree America is a touch paranoid since 9/11, it's better to be paranoid then sorry.

      This sorta thing is perferly normal, and just means that your friendly neighborhood intelligence agency is doing their job. They read their tea leaves and report on what could be a threat, in this case a fictional one.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    16. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by pjt33 · · Score: 1
      We're talking about the government with supposedly the most intelligence
      Who on Earth supposes that?
    17. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by Twinky · · Score: 1
      I do not think the US Army is the largest, it was China the last time I checked.



      Regarding the number of people, sure. Doesn't mean they have the strongest army though. Always keep in mind: The US military spending is higher than that of all other countries -- combined.

    18. Re:Jesus Fucking Christ. by razol · · Score: 1

      He said largest, not strongest. However, you are correct, his does depend on how you measure size. By number of troops, I believe that China is the largest. Measuring via monetary units is inaccurate because US troops are paid, other countries are conscripted and do not earn comparable wages for their service. Since payroll is the largest expense in the US military this is not an equal comparison. The US defense budget would be markedly lower if soldiers were conscripts.

  15. Threat matrix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Anyone care to explain this? According to Google it's some kind of TV show...

    1. Re:Threat matrix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "Threat Matrix" is apparently the daily briefing the president recieves every day detailing possible threats on security, or at least that's what the promos for the show said.

  16. DOS attack on use non-intelligence by sPaKr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the US can so call intelligence community can be fooled into sending out alerts based on a Sega game how hard can it be fore AlQuda to send out false threats to yo-yo with the servalince. Since all this does is tell real people to do things sooner or later they will get tired and ignore the warnings thus allowing for a real threat to go further then it would without the DOS attack. I mean the terrorist aholes should start scaring people left and right, force the threat level up and down. How much risk is there to leak false intelligance.. then not follow through. Sooner or later we will get fed up, let our guard down and whamo they get a free ride. Jebus I really should wash my gray hat its looking darker and darker every day.

    1. Re:DOS attack on use non-intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only hat you're wearing is a dunce cap.

      Non-intelligence? AlQuda? Servalince? Intelligance?

      Are you suggesting that the U.S. government should just not worry about it because of a Crying Wolf effect?

      Is this at all an indicator of effectiveness of information?

      How informed are you if you place credit in this article then put on your magical psuedo-hacker realpolitik guru hat?

      What exactly is your solution to 'false alarms'?

      Just because you post on Slashdot and spend time on EFNet trading pirated media while bragging about your Visual Basic ICMP ping executables, it doesn't mean that you've earned a 'hat'.

    2. Re:DOS attack on use non-intelligence by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      I mean the terrorist aholes should start scaring people left and right, force the threat level up and down. How much risk is there to leak false intelligance.. then not follow through. Sooner or later we will get fed up, let our guard down and whamo they get a free ride. Jebus I really should wash my gray hat its looking darker and darker every day.

      This has more or less happened every time an "Orange Alert" has been issued so far.

    3. Re:DOS attack on use non-intelligence by shiftless · · Score: 1

      If the US can so call intelligence community can be fooled into sending out alerts based on a Sega game how hard can it be fore AlQuda to send out false threats to yo-yo with the servalince. Since all this does is tell real people to do things sooner or later they will get tired and ignore the warnings thus allowing for a real threat to go further then it would without the DOS attack. I mean the terrorist aholes should start scaring people left and right, force the threat level up and down. How much risk is there to leak false intelligance.. then not follow through. Sooner or later we will get fed up, let our guard down and whamo they get a free ride. Jebus I really should wash my gray hat its looking darker and darker every day.

      This isn't a computer, dude, this is the Pentagon. They don't work like that.

  17. "Sir, we've received a terrorist threat!" by Nova+Express · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Against what?"

    "Every single military installation worldwide!"

    "Really? What did it say?"

    "'All Your Base Are Belong To Us."

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

    1. Re:"Sir, we've received a terrorist threat!" by in7ane · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not funny, and I quote:

      "a borderline terrorist threat depending on what someone interprets it to mean."

      /struggling to keep a straight face.

    2. Re:"Sir, we've received a terrorist threat!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Its been said once and I'll say it again...

      Its all fun and games until someone gets hurt.

    3. Re:"Sir, we've received a terrorist threat!" by in7ane · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I was trying to be humorous in the parent, but guess it does deserve to be informative for the benefit of the US readers though (after-all I guess it's was as inappropriate as telling jokes about Stalin )

      And while I got the soapbox, the grandparent is not "Redundant", it's hilarious, so what if the summary mentions AYB, it is a modification/extension.

    4. Re:"Sir, we've received a terrorist threat!" by Alsee · · Score: 1
      WE ARE THE BORG.

      YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED.

      RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

      ::Waits for Secret Service to come investigating terrorist threat above::

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  18. Almost unbelievable... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 5, Informative

    The story is so silly it's almost unbelievable.

    But then Powell used a Graduate Student's Thesis to justify a war against Iraq in front of the entire world.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    1. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Kruid · · Score: 2, Informative
      I believe that was Tony "the lapdog" Blair, hence the article's reference to "No. 10" as in 10 Downing St.

      We should give credit where credit is due.

      -k

      --
      Your mind moves quicker than a nun's first curry. - A. Rimmer
    2. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Applepuppy · · Score: 1

      This is exactly why I specify that I killed a MONSTER or a VIDEO GAME PLAYER when I chat in online message boards.

    3. Re:Almost unbelievable... by cheezedawg · · Score: 5, Informative

      The story is so silly it's almost unbelievable.

      Its a freaking rumor. It probably has little truth behind it.

      But then Powell used a Graduate Student's Thesis to justify a war against Iraq in front of the entire world.

      No he didn't. Here is the text of Powell's UN address. He didn't mention anything from the UK dossier.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    4. Re:Almost unbelievable... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If it was Usenet, someone could just quote your message and add some joke about cruise missles. Then it could be used in court against you. That has already happened to Keith Henson.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    5. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please provide your evidence that this is a rumor, or at least provide a link of someone backing up your claims.

      I'm not trying to be snide. I am honestly looking for a good counter argument to the parent post.

    6. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please provide your evidence that this is a rumor, or at least provide a link of someone backing up your claims.

      The link was in the post, dipshit. Read Powell's address and compare it to the thesis. Duh.

    7. Re:Almost unbelievable... by cheezedawg · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Um, my evidence that it is a rumor is that its in the "Washington Whispers" rumor column in US News. I thought that was obvious.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    8. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that's the evidence then we're fucked.

      True, no where in Powell's brief did he say "I got this info from a UK Dossier which was plagarized from a graduate student's thesis".

      However, Powell did reference UK intellegence. We'd like to see if that UK intellegence is the same as the disputed student thesis.

      If it is not true, it should be easy for a Bush supporter to put all 3 documents side by side and show that there is no link.

    9. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell is the "Washington Whispers" column. US News? Do you mean the "US News and World report" or something?

      Are you unable to find your evidence or something? If you can't provide a fucking link, then shut the hell up.

    10. Re:Almost unbelievable... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He didn't mention anything from the UK dossier.

      He praised the document. Here's a quote from Powell's speech (On 2/5/03):

      I would call my colleagues' attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed yesterday which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.

      The paper in question was "Iraq - its infrastructure of concealment, deception and intimidation".

      Number 10 Downing Street later admited that they plagerized a document from a Graduate Thesis (Search for "Iraq"). This certainly puts the quality of some of the intellegence in question.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,8909 16 ,00.html

      I'm not arguing with accuracy of the text itself. But look,
      this was Bush's chance to provide inarguable evidence that we should go to War.

      Powell was presenting the President's argument for War in Iraq in front of the whole world.

      The US is supposed to be the greatest nation in the world. We go to war only as a last resort and only when are arguments are sound and just. Right?

      Bush could have convinced the entire world if he had used quality evidence, when a huge percentage of the world (and the US) doubted the reasons for war.

      So what does Powell, when presenting this inarguable evidence, cite as a "fine paper"? A document was was largely lifted from a Graduate Student thesis.

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    11. Re:Almost unbelievable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the grandparent post did show a connection between the Powell's speech adn the UK Document and the Thesis.

      Duh.

    12. Re:Almost unbelievable... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

      No, it's not very obvious. Not everyone reads the "Washington Whispers" column in the US News. A link would be helpful.

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    13. Re:Almost unbelievable... by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Bush could have convinced the entire world if he had used quality evidence, when a huge percentage of the world (and the US) doubted the reasons for war.


      Well, the big problem is that IRAQ has stopped developing WMDs just after the war with Bush Sr so it would have been very hard for Bush Jr to find quality evidence.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    14. Re:Almost unbelievable... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

      So Bush Jr. had evidence which was good enough to go to war and kill thousands of people, but not good enough to convince the world that we should go to war?

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  19. Did they get this info removed from google? by GraZZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Funny, I googled and got nothing but the news story. Even googling without the quotes doesn't give anything about the game.

    Does the US Gov't have hooks into google to prevent "Terrorist" information from being found?

    1. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you get 2 hits when you Google Don Emilio Fulci, the story, and a page in French which does mention his name in the context of the game

    2. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by yeremein · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I tried "Don Emilio Fulci", I got one result, in French, which is a review for the video game.

      Also, Googling for "Don Fulci" gives several results related to Headhunter.

    3. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by RotJ · · Score: 1

      I got a French gaming site. If you remove the "Don", a FAQ/walkthrough for the game also shows up.

    4. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by JDevers · · Score: 1

      Searching for just the name and not the "Don" I found several non-English pages referencing the game...this isn't really TOO surprising since the game wasn't exactly a hit and wasn't actually released in the US at all.

    5. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by Stuwee · · Score: 1

      Removing the language restriction would help more than removing the quotes. Second of two results, and in Spanish, but it's there. Still, this is an April fools somewhere along the line.

    6. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by hool5400 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try google for "Don Fulci" or "Don Fulci headhunter" . A lot more hits.

      --

      Remember, it takes 42 muscles to frown and only 4 to pull the trigger of a sniper rifle.
    7. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was realeased worldwide for PS2.

      There was moderate hype about it, but it was completely eclipsed by Metal Gear Solid SOL - of which Headhunter is but a second rate clone.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    8. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by GraZZ · · Score: 1

      My bad, looks like someone turned on english language restrictions in my google prefs (not me!!)

    9. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by maxbang · · Score: 1

      article says this was from last april. ya think maybe web pages and google's index changes in a year?

      --
      I also reply below your current threshold.
    10. Re:Did they get this info removed from google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think its common knowledge that the search engine the government uses includeds everything on the internet as appossed to the censored search engines the public has to use.

  20. They Got Told by RabidChicken · · Score: 2, Funny

    *NSA Laughs and nervously rubs neck*
    Yeah, that Splinter Cell is just a silly ol' game too.

  21. In a related story... by YodaToo · · Score: 0, Redundant

    A the cryptic message "all your base are belong to us" was intercepted from a suspected terrorist cell. All US military bases on alert.

  22. Today's Threat Matrix by raehl · · Score: 4, Funny

    NYC sewer system may be target of a disgruntled mafia splinter group, ringleaders believed to be two brothers named Mario and Luigi.

    1. Re:Today's Threat Matrix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry we safely moved the princess to another castle...

    2. Re:Today's Threat Matrix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were based in the sewer, and then the Ninja Turtles kicked them out.

  23. Aha! by sterno · · Score: 5, Funny

    That would explain the missing WMD's quite nicely :)

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Aha! by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      The WMD's are really the Ocarina of Time.

    2. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You do realize that it was never a question of if Iraq had WMD's or not. The world saw him use them, for cryin out loud. The only question that remains is what he did with them. He was supposed to show the world proof that he destroyed the weapons. That never happened.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    3. Re:Aha! by sean23007 · · Score: 1

      Saddam: "I destroyed them. Note, I don't have them any more. Come look."

      Response: "Aha! He's hiding them! Now you will die."

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    4. Re:Aha! by prockcore · · Score: 1

      He was supposed to show the world proof that he destroyed the weapons. That never happened.

      Well duh, can't prove a negative.

    5. Re:Aha! by Limburgher · · Score: 1

      Yes, we saw him use them, in the early 1990's. What about NOW? That's what actually matters.

      --

      You are not the customer.

    6. Re:Aha! by MagikSlinger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He did show proof, but as the inspectors pointed out, it wasn't the legal standard of proof they needed. They were shown documents and videos of weapon program destruction, but because specific ammounts, etc. weren't recorded, he got in trouble because he couldn't prove he destroyed exactly 20,000 litres of VX.

      But as it turns out, Hussein's scientists probably lied to him about the original estimates anyway.

      --
      The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
    7. Re:Aha! by CuriousGTime · · Score: 1

      This is the most ignorant statement I have ever read. Why the hell is this moderated insightful?

    8. Re:Aha! by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Saddam: "I destroyed them. Note, I don't have them any more. Come look."

      Response: "Aha! He's hiding them! Now you will die."

      More like-
      Saddam: "They are all destroyed"

      Response: "How? When? Where are the empty shells? The incionerators?"

      Saddam: "I don't remember"

      Response: "bullshit!"

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:Aha! by protohiro1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well, all we know is that Saddam didn't have them anymore when the US invaded. That seems to explain why Han Blix didn't find anything when his team was in Iraq before the war. I don't think there was any "evidence of absence" that would have satisfied the Bush administration and called of the war.

      Luckily, thanks to Mr. Bush & co we have succesfully captured thousands of tons of VX guns and some yellow cake uranium. Iraq is also now a peaceful democracy and a shining becon of freedom to the middle east.

      --
      Sig removed because it was obnoxious
    10. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Saddam never opened up for us to "come look". There were a dozen UNSEC resolutions during the 1990's condemning him for his lack of cooperation. In 1998 he completely gave up the pretense of cooperating and forced the inspectors to leave. It took 250,000 troops on his doorstep in 2003 to make him change his mind. And even then, he was unable to account for all of the weapons that UNMOVIC knew he had.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    11. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 2

      Good question. If Saddam had actually complied with the UN resolutions, we would know the answer to that question, now wouldn't we?

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    12. Re:Aha! by horza · · Score: 1

      You do realize that it was never a question of if Iraq had WMD's or not. The world saw him use them, for cryin out loud. The only question that remains is what he did with them. He was supposed to show the world proof that he destroyed the weapons. That never happened.

      At last someone speaks some sense as opposed to the rather trendy abandoning of facts because it's the "politically correct barb". I feel you may be outnumbered by those that have a tabloid-like memory.

      Phillip.

    13. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well, all we know is that Saddam didn't have them anymore when the US invaded.

      Unless you have some inside knowledge here, we do NOT know that. We do not know where the weapons are, hence the term "unaccounted".

      You see, this was not a hide a seek game. The cease-fire that Saddam agreed to in Safwan, and the subsequent UN resolutions 678 and 687 were very specific about what Saddam needed to do. He gave the UN proof that some of the weapons were destroyed, and some other weapons have degraded over time and are likely now useless, but nobody (including Hans Blix or Chirac or Shroeder) claims that he complied with the disarmament.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    14. Re:Aha! by rickbrodie · · Score: 1
      I know i shouldn't be replying to this but:

      By you logic, if the US had never supplied him with the weapons in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess now.

    15. Re:Aha! by rickbrodie · · Score: 1

      So what? The US was the only country ever to use a nuclear weapon in anger (twice I might add). Does this mean that they intend to use them now?

    16. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not proving a negative. There are 1000 tonnes of chemical agent that existed. Destroying these weapons is not trivial. It requires equipment and time and expertise. We just want evidence of any of that, and Saddam has been unable to provide it.

    17. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 1

      Ignorant of what? We did know he had weapons. We did see him use them. He hasn't accounted for all of those weapons we knew he had. How ignorant of me to bring that up.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    18. Re:Aha! by cheezedawg · · Score: 1

      Um, all of his tanks, guns, and aircraft were Russian, and the chemical weapons he has used were either German or Japanese, but definately not US or British. It looks to me like he was doing fine getting weapons without our help.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    19. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.firethistime.org/chrono98.htm (take a gander at October 31st)

      http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/text/iraq1216.t xt

      http://www.state.gov/www/regions/nea/pmiraq.html

      I guess we can't trust a president who lies, after all, huh? Too bad you didn't stand up and scream "no blood for oil" when your boy Bubba was in office. If you had, you wouldn't appear to be such a looney partisan hypocrite right now.

    20. Re:Aha! by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      The irony of it all was the Saddam thought he was in defiance. It turns out the scientists for his "Weapons of Mass Destruction" program were robbing him blind. Iraq of late was a giant "Kleptocracy."

      The researchers and techs weren't hiding WMD from the UN. They were hiding the complete and utter absence of them from Saddam, lest they and their families be sent to afterlife in the most grisly way Uday could devise.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    21. Re:Aha! by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      And even then, he was unable to account for all of the weapons that UNMOVIC knew he had.

      But strangely, in the year since, no one has found these "weapons that UNMOVIC knew he had", or any sign that they ever existed except as dubious reports by paid informers and fuzzy photpgraphs that could have been anything, despite a desperate desire by Bush and Blair to justify their invasion.

    22. Re:Aha! by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Umm, not to put too fine of a point on it, but Fat Man and Little Boy were technically *atomic* weapons, not nuclear.

      http://www.airpowermuseum.org/tratmgal.html
      htt p://www.thebulletin.org/research/qanda/differen ce.html

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    23. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nuclear is a general term for weapons that release energy from nuclear reactions. Atomic refers to the earliest and least sophisticated weapons, which use nuclear fission."

      All atomic weapons are nuclear, but not all nuclear weapons are atomic is to all apples are fruit, but not all fruit are apples.

    24. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And even then, he was unable to account for all of the weapons that UNMOVIC knew he had.

      Ah, yes. Those would be the weapons that the American intelligence knew the precise numbers and locations of, but weren't allowed to tell the inspectors in case it compromised their sources, right?

      Those would be the weapons which we have been completely unable to find the slightest trace of, over a year after Saddam was removed from power, despite there being no further need to protect any sources?

      Those would be the weapons which didn't fucking exist?

      Don't get me wrong, I think we were right to invade on human rights grounds alone. Saddam was an evil dictator and I'm glad he's gone. But that doesn't alter the fact that they lied to us about the WMD. I don't know about you, but I don't appreciate being lied to.

  24. easy as that by 6pak · · Score: 1, Funny

    wonder if anyone in the white house did consider calling spiderman for help. keep watching the night sky if you happen to live in D.C...

  25. Here's proof... by sirgoran · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That the government flunkies don't get out enough.

    Don't they know that "all work and no play makes jack a dull boy"?

    Perhaps we need to coin a new acronym.

    How about "DSFR".

    Do Some Freaking Reasearch.

    -Goran

    --
    Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
  26. If you ask that sort of question ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 4, Funny
    or in fact ask any questions or even allow yourself in the solitary darkness to in any way doubt the true path that our holy warriors have been set by our commander in chief and recipient of the true word, then the terrorists have won.

    A relocation expert from sunny Guantanamo Bay will be coming by in a few minutes to assist you in understanding the heretical error in your ways. I hope you're photogenic.

  27. Um... by ljfrench · · Score: 1

    April Fools was a little over a month ago...

    1. Re:Um... by sommerfeld · · Score: 1

      I bet it was an april fool's prank gone wrong...

  28. Cover for real terrorists by HermesHuang · · Score: 5, Funny

    Once this story gets out someone's going to realize that they can disguise an underground movement by naming it after a video game's bad guys. Then the FBI will think it's just a video game clan.

    1. Re:Cover for real terrorists by Stuwee · · Score: 1

      Once this story gets out

      This is Slashdot. I think we can officially say that the story is out.

    2. Re:Cover for real terrorists by BRSloth · · Score: 1

      I never thought about that! Finally, my evil plan can be unleashed! Muahahaha!

      From now on, you can call me Tony Vercetti.

    3. Re:Cover for real terrorists by nacturation · · Score: 1

      I am currently going by the name "Duke Nukem", and have issued a date when my "Forever" doomsday device will be unleashed upon the world! Fortunately, everybody will think it'll never happen, thus my plan will come to fruition!

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    4. Re:Cover for real terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we can officially say that the story is out.

      The story is out... to a few thousand sweaty geeks. If /. was as powerful as you losers think, then everybody would be using Linux. Since nobody does use linux, we can safely dismiss the garbage on this site as the delusional rants of angry virgin losers.

    5. Re:Cover for real terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey!

      Who are you calling delusional?

    6. Re:Cover for real terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should outlaw names!

      This way, only criminals will have them!

    7. Re:Cover for real terrorists by innerlimit · · Score: 1

      so their nick would be like

      [alKeyda]FbIsUXors or [alKeyda]L33tdOOd ???

      it's late... i had a drink... it's funny to me

    8. Re:Cover for real terrorists by Myco · · Score: 1

      "When it's done," right?

  29. Something's fishy. by jamonterrell · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like... only 3 results, the usnews article was the top then some french article I didn't bother to read. Anyone know of this character or even the game? I'm not really a Sega person... speaking of which... Sega? When was the last time you saw a Sega? And htis happened last April.... hmm... something fishy.

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    1. Re:Something's fishy. by ReciprocityProject · · Score: 2, Informative

      When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like... only 3 results, the usnews article was the top then some french article I didn't bother to read. Anyone know of this character or even the game? I'm not really a Sega person... speaking of which... Sega? When was the last time you saw a Sega? And htis happened last April.... hmm... something fishy.

      Try googling "Don Fulci" instead of the full name. "Emilio Fulci" also got a little bit, but "Don Fulci" brings up a lot. I didn't see the article but didn't look very hard either.

      Also I think the "French" article was actually Italian, despite google's attempt to translate from the French, but I don't know either language.

      As for Sega, I've never heard of that. ;-)

    2. Re:Something's fishy. by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      I'm not really a Sega person... speaking of which... Sega? When was the last time you saw a Sega?

      Not a game for a Sega. It's a game made by the company Sega. If I recall correctly, they gave up the console work many years ago but have stuck around making games.

    3. Re:Something's fishy. by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      some french article i didn't bother to read.

      Yeah, theres your problem. The french article is a review of the video game. kind of odd, our government to learn about their intelligence mistakes from the french

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
  30. Another News Flash by rinkjustice · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somebody better tell the US government there's flaming skull guys floating around too (and they look like they're up to no good).

  31. Gameshark by The_Rippa · · Score: 4, Funny

    We'll, then all the FBI has to do is plug in their Gameshark and enter the following codes...

    Hero Is Immortal 24509328 36F055F8
    Enemies Are Blind 24109228 36705568

    1. Re:Gameshark by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      We'll, then all the FBI has to do is plug in their Gameshark and enter the following codes...
      Hero Is Immortal 24509328 36F055F8
      Enemies Are Blind 24109228 36705568

      That would be typical for the FBI; they'll forget the enabling code:
      M (Must be on) 453ABE78 9CB751FF

      Not that I know anything about this Gameshark thingy you speak of.

    2. Re:Gameshark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The second cheat code is a scam.

      Given what Bushco has already got away with, the American people (and justice) are already blind.

  32. Re:Watch the Plumber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahaha.... you are s0 FUNNYIE! your the firstest pERSon! to mAKE THE MARIO FUNIE!

  33. Update... by hoggoth · · Score: 2, Funny

    > 'the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix one day last April'

    Slight typo, that was supposed to read:
    'the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix day one last April'

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  34. relax, it's just an abhorrence by kippy · · Score: 1


    In all likelihood this is an anomaly of the highest order. They probably got this from some data mining software that processes internet traffic. I'm not surprised that a program would pick this up and not realize that it's a fictional character.

    Anyway, you have to expect that no system is perfect and that mistakes will be made from time to time. This was just one of those wacky mistakes. I'd sleep easy. The rest of what they are doing is probably accurate and affective. We'll just never know one way or the other. But since the country isn't a pile of ashes right now, I think the intelligence community is doing their job pretty well.

    1. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
      > They probably got this from some data mining software that processes internet traffic. I'm not surprised that a program would pick this up and not realize that it's a fictional character.

      Which reminds me, never mind this Fulci guy, it's been over 20 years and they still haven't found Carmen Sandiego! Where in the world is she?

    2. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by Tebriel · · Score: 1

      No no, where in time/i is Carmen Sandiego...

      --
      The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
    3. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An abbhorrence is the state of hating something. You're looking for "aberration." And no, I don't think this is just an aberration: this is what happens when you politicize the intelligence community: you put in dipwads who know how to ape the party line but can tell their ass from their elbow.

    4. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by servognome · · Score: 1

      The terrorists have time machines!!! I guess our only choice is to send in Timecop

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    5. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by taernim · · Score: 1

      Maybe A Capella can sing us a hint.... ;-)

      --
      "PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
    6. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by Alsee · · Score: 1

      She's having sex with Waldo.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    7. Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wait, Carmen is a she?!?!"

      -the FBI

  35. Sounds like we were trolled. by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like... only 3 results, the usnews article was the top then some french article I didn't bother to read.
    Anyone know of this character or even the game? I'm not really a Sega person... speaking of which... Sega? When was the last time you saw a Sega? And this happened last April.... hmm... something fishy.

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    1. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Jussi+K.+Kojootti · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like... only 3 results, the usnews article was the top then some french article I didn't bother to read.
      Well, just looking at the title would have been enough: "Headhunter".
      As a sidenote, I don't know any french, but the first paragraphs are still pretty easy to understand: "Headhunter est donc un Metal Gear-like (ou un jeu d'action infiltration, si vous preferez) edité par Sega." (ok, 'Metal Gear-like' might not be french)
    2. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try "Don Fulci" - you'll get hits for the game.

    3. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by gilrain · · Score: 0, Informative

      Yes. Almost everybody knows about the game, at least. Apparently you live under a rock, or a large, rock-like object.

      Another item for your rock-belabored self: the reason you haven't seen a Sega in a while is because they dropped out of the hardware business. They are now solely a game developer and publisher for other consoles.

      If you really wanna get crazy and unrocklike, you could research the recent rumor that Sega may announce a new console at E3. Which, if the rock has been heavy on you recently, starts in the next few days. However, as you might find, this rumor is highly unlikely.

    4. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by zoloto · · Score: 1

      true.. but maybe they're just catching up on their massive database of stuff. they're just searching from the past to the present. soo in a matter of time they'll process info in real time.

      ick. /tinfoilhatmode-on

    5. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by nacturation · · Score: 0, Interesting

      None of the reviews (eg: this one) talk about a Fulci character. The main character is James Earl Cash. The only link for Don Emilio Fulci in Google is a game called Headhunt, and doesn't appear to be the same as Manhunt. Fulci, in Headhunt, is the father of one of the character's girlfriend.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    6. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Jaywalk · · Score: 1
      When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like...
      I got a number of reviews when I searched for "headhunter fulci". Here's one of them. Doesn't sound like one to write home about.
      --
      ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
    7. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Try Googling with
      Don Fulci -"Don't" -"don't"

      it's the first link. I am sure that they tried several versions of the name. After all they were after a terrorist and who knows if the terrorist signed up online use their full name, last name, or some nickname.
      When you take over the world your first name can be omitted. Your title and last name are sufficient.

    8. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      E3 starts today.

    9. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you saw a Sega?

      There hasn't been a Sega console since the Dreamcast. However, as a result of getting out of the console-making business, Sega was then freed to write games for the other consoles.

      In short, they saw themselves being trapped writing games for a fourth place console. They got more than quadruple the possible console audience they had by abaondoning their own platform and becoming an accepted writer for other platforms.

    10. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Headhunter est donc un Metal Gear-like (ou un jeu d'action infiltration, si vous preferez) edité par Sega.

      Headhunter is a Metal Gear-like (or an action/infiltration game, if you prefer) produced by Sega.

      Je n'ai oublie pas tout mon francais... (Pity Slashdot doesn't allow the accent aigu that should be on the e in oublie... no matter).

    11. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by SphericalCrusher · · Score: 1

      The last time I saw a Sega was yesterday when I was playing my Dreamcast. Even today, way after the release of the Playstation 2, Xbox, and GameCube, the Sega Dreamcast is still my favorite console.

      And who's to say that Sega can't just make games? That's exactly what they are doing now anyway, and they are doing a damn good job at it. I really miss Sega being in the hardware industry... hopefully one day they will get back into it, but I know that will never happen.

      Long live Sega!

      --
      "Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
    12. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by gilrain · · Score: 1

      According to e3expo.com, it is May 12-14.

    13. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When I just googled, I saw nothing of the like... only 3 results,

      Google Search: "Don Fulci" Results 1 - 10 of about 81 for "Don Fulci".
      PSXNATION: Run by a crack team of hardcore gamers.
      NTSC-uk review > Dreamcast > Headhunter
      GamePartisan.com | Sony | Review
      etc...

    14. Re:Sounds like we were trolled. by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Okay, to take my theory that we got trolled a little bit further for those who didn't bother to at least stop and think about it.

      There are a couple of a problems with this kind of story:
      1.) It's very sensational and funny. Something you woudln't expect to happen but 'did'.
      2.) It's only being carried by ONE news site. Something this humorous and blunderous that has such far reaching claims of incompotency in our intelligence departments should have made bigger news. Why didn't it? The other news agencies did not or could not collaborate it. Either it's true and was successfully burried or it never happened.
      3.) There are little to no details about why/how this made it to the top of the "terror threat matrix." One anonymous tip? Come on, as much as it's funny to think that our intelligence departments are stupid, do you really believe they're THAT stupid?
      4.) Why did finding the name in a game have any bearing on whether this person was a threat? The FBI didn't drop their case against Cap'n Crunch when they found out he was just a cereal advertising cartoon character, did they?

      I'd expect to be reading this in an e-mail titled "Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: Re: Game character plots terror attack against USA." Not on slashdot. We should be the experts on trolling, not the ones to feed it.
      Jamon.

      Btw, Someone needs to remind these moderators that moderation is not for making your opinion heard or making the oponents opinion heard, it's to promote easily reading discussion on the topic without having to sift through trolls, flaimbait, and offtopic posts. And I urge anyone who meta-moderates to help us clear out people who abuse the moderation system as a way to filter their opinions upon everyone else.

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
  36. In other news by DrugCheese · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sorry Mario, but our princess is in another castle ...

    --
    *DrugCheese rants*
  37. The Feds Are On The Case! by Steve+B · · Score: 3, Funny

    They've already kept steps to keep this dangerous terrorist from getting his hands on a handbook for computer crime.

    --
    /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
    1. Re:The Feds Are On The Case! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      That's just the joke version. Everyone knows that they keep the real one in a different location.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  38. BULLSHIT by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 2, Funny

    Try googleing on "Don Emilio Fulci" and you will get two links. One is the story that we saw, and the other is in Italian.

    Are we expected to believe that our security agents were able to decode a web page written in Italian? That's just asking us to believe too much.

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    1. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disappointing. You didn't use the word "fuck" anywhere in your post.

    2. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, you have me confused with some other muthafucka.

    3. Re:BULLSHIT by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      Are we expected to believe that our security agents were able to decode a web page written in Italian? That's just asking us to believe too much.
      Given that you can't tell the difference between a gossip column and real news, what can we expect of the security agents?
    4. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't tell the fucking difference between a joke and a straight line, so WHAT was your point?

      ATTENTION Derek Lyons has lost his sense of humor. If anyone sees it, they should return it quickly. He really needs it badly. His ass is puckering so hard that it's in danger of turning into a black hole.

  39. Brain fart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    a reclusive millionaire had formed a terrorist group with the intent of launching chemical weapons attacks on Western cities.

    Did anyone else read 'reclusive' as 'recursive'? What would a recursive millionaire do?

    1. Re:Brain fart by j3ll0 · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else read 'reclusive' as 'recursive'? What would a recursive millionaire do?

      They'd sire lots of kids....each of whom would be a millionaire.

      case in point

    2. Re:Brain fart by ReyTFox · · Score: 1

      He would count his money by running this routine:

      count_money(bills) {
      if bills.empty()==true {
      return 0;
      }
      else {
      amount = count_money(bills);
      thisbill = bills.pop_bill();
      amount +=thisbill.read_bill();
      return amount;
      }
      }

      Unfortunately, he isn't very good at other tasks such as sorting. But that's why he has a housekeeper.

    3. Re:Brain fart by kirun · · Score: 2, Funny

      They'd use all their money to invent a time machine, then go back in time and play the stock market to get the money.

      --
      I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
    4. Re:Brain fart by gordyf · · Score: 1

      Looks like an infinite loop to me - don't you have to remove an element of bills before you call yourself again? Your list doesn't get shorter until after the recursive call returns, which... won't happen, since the recursive call won't return.

  40. I don't see how... by Cranx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't see how so many of you conclude that the government doesn't know a real threat from a video game character. A threat can crop up in any one of a gazillion ways. Once made, they have to verify threats before they take them seriously. They did. They determined it was a video game character.

    How else does it work? Magic? When a threat comes in, they use telepathic powers to determine that any given name is a real one and not a video game character? A quick google isn't to everyone's liking?

    Dumbasses.

    1. Re:I don't see how... by Antaeus+Feldspar · · Score: 1
      Once made, they have to verify threats before they take them seriously.


      From the story:

      It was the lead item on the government's daily threat matrix one day last April.


      I will be the first to admit that I don't know just what it means to be the "lead item" on the "daily threat matrix". But it sounds like the FBI did exactly the reverse of what you suggested: treated it as a serious matter, bringing it straight up to the attention of FBI director Robert Mueller, before taking any steps to find out whether the truth might be anything other than what an anonymous tipster claimed.

      You seem to be claiming that because the hoax was at some point discovered to be just that, a hoax, that our counter-terrorism apparatus is clearly functioning just fine; and you seem to be attributing to all those who disagree the straw man position that the government should have known by "magic" or "telepathy" whether it was true or not.

      But if this incident is true, then it points to a weakness in our counter-terrorism planning. How much manpower was wasted on this threat? How many real threats were pushed aside for this to become the lead item on the threat matrix? It sounds like whoever dropped this "tip" achieved a lot of reaction for very little effort. Whose goals does that sound like? Shouldn't the fact that this "reclusive but evil millionare" was unknown to their files have raised at least some suspicion before they elevated this to such importance?
      --
      If people are to respect the law, perhaps the law should begin by respecting the people.
    2. Re:I don't see how... by Cranx · · Score: 1

      What are the criteria for being at the top on the threat matrix for one day? What does it take? What puts something at the top?

      I would guess: being the most serious threat for which there is little or no intelligence. (AKA, something dark and spooky)

      Once intelligence starts to come in on an item, I would guess then that the threat goes down in the hierarchy. The more is known, the less of a threat it is. Also, intelligence might show it's not a threat at all.

      So, all I see is something got reported (perhaps by one or more pranksters). It sounded really bad. No one had any information on it. It became a priority. Once it became a priority, work started. First task: quick look around, google, phone books, etc. Google comes up: just a video game character. Item drops off the matrix.

      I don't see "top of the threat matrix" to mean "the most serious threat that all of our intelligence corroborates." I don't think it takes ANY corroboration at all to get on the matrix or reach the top. Actually, I am pretty damn sure this is the case. Why else would a video game character go to the top of the threat matrix? Because fields agents reported his activities? No. LACK of information is probably what put the character at the top of the matrix.

      This is, I think, how it's supposed to go.

    3. Re:I don't see how... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      It should never have reached the Director of the FBI and the Whitehouse.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    4. Re:I don't see how... by Antaeus+Feldspar · · Score: 1

      What are the criteria for being at the top on the threat matrix for one day? What does it take? What puts something at the top?


      That's just it. I don't know, and neither do you.


      I don't see "top of the threat matrix" to mean "the most serious threat that all of our intelligence corroborates." I don't think it takes ANY corroboration at all to get on the matrix or reach the top. Actually, I am pretty damn sure this is the case.


      Why? Because that's how you would run it if it was yours to run; because that's how any intelligent person would run it? That's a natural assumption to make, and it's also hella dangerous. Any reasonable person would also have assumed that if Joseph McCarthy stood up with a piece of paper in his hand and announced that it contained the names of known communists in the State Department, that surely the paper would have actual names on it -- that it would not be, in fact, blank.

      Back in the 1980's, the authorities had a big checklist of symptoms that indicated a sexually abused child. The presence of any of these symptoms was considered to be a strong indicator of probable sexual abuse. This checklist was used to instigate many sexual abuse investigations, some of which ballooned to mammoth proportions.

      Now you'd think that, where this was the checklist, the investigative tool, that someone would have thought to check whether those "symptoms" that indicated likely sexual abuse actually occurred in children who hadn't been abused, as well. But no one did, possibly because everyone assumed that such an obvious step had already been taken. (Just as you are assuming that being "the lead item on the threat matrix" must not mean they were attaching any special importance to it that they really should have reserved until it began corresponding to the real world.) And guess what? When someone finally thought of the elementary step of checking a control group, most of those "symptoms" turned out to be symptoms.... of being an entirely normal child.
      --
      If people are to respect the law, perhaps the law should begin by respecting the people.
    5. Re:I don't see how... by Cranx · · Score: 1

      Regardless of what it might be fun to think, American intelligence is still the best in the world. Whatever the cause was, you have to assume the most obvious, if you assume anything. Don't assume U.S. intel made a blunder; assume you don't understand how the threat matrix is operated. I am 99.9% certain most people here have only the most rudimentary understanding of the threat matrix. So I don't buy the knee-jerk snickering that U.S. intel did something stupid. My first assumption is: we don't know something about how the threat matrix is operated.

      People seem to assume that investigations are done BEFORE a person reaches the top of the threat matrix. What I believe, and I think it's logical, is that little or no investigation is done beforehand. A person is elevated to the top of the threat matrix based on some primitive criteria: the reported threat, the person's resources, placement within their organization and whether or not we know anything about them. A person who threatens the U.S., who is rich and is reported to head a terrorist organization would shoot to the top, especially if we had no information on them.

      My guess is, and I see no other logical conclusion, is that reaching the top of the threat matrix is not the RESULT of investigation, it is trigger that STARTS an investigation.

      Do you see my point? People are assuming that reaching the top of the threat matrix as the result of investigation. Perhaps none is done at all. Perhaps the threat matrix is the mechanism by which we convert reports into investigations. Perhaps the threat matrix is filled through simple anonymous phone calls, and the items with the least information get priority until they can be placed into a more appropriate position in the matrix.

      Either way, since we don't really know, why make the assumption that a mistake was made? Because it's humorous? Perhaps...but you can't overlook the obvious just to allow an assumption to seem true for the sake of humor.

    6. Re:I don't see how... by Antaeus+Feldspar · · Score: 1

      Wow, you do deserve your screen-name.

      The whole point is that this incident may, or may not, point to serious weaknesses and vulnerabilities within the current structure and operation of the American intelligence apparatus. Starting with a blank, blind assumption that "American intelligence is still the best in the world" and expecting to get an accurate assessment out of that is damned silly.

      I'll repeat it again: I don't know, and neither do you, how an anonymous tip gets to be "lead item on the threat matrix", or just what significance that has. You are doing your country no favors if you reason backwards from what you wish to be true, that American intelligence is just fine, and pretend this serves as proof that lead item on the threat matrix is a perfectly reasonable place for a threat from a videogame character to be.

      If you wish to be an asset to your country, go read the original seminal "Groupthink" by Irving Janis. You will find that in many of history's tragic, preventable disasters, a key factor is that individuals privately had doubts and reservations about the wisdom of the actions they were about to take -- and because they assumed that the group knew better than they did, that they should keep those doubts to themselves. Was American intelligence the best in the world when it presented President Kennedy with the plan for the Bay of Pigs invasion? Clearly not -- and if JFK had had the foresight to look at the plan critically, rather than to assume that the CIA's experience and self-confidence made it right, he almost certainly would have avoided the worst blunder of his administration.

      Perhaps some people are "allow[ing] an assumption to seem true for the sake of humor" in this affair. You are wrong, if you think this justifies your making the contrary assumption, that a threat from a videogame character making its way all the way up to the FBI director is perfectly normal.

      --
      If people are to respect the law, perhaps the law should begin by respecting the people.
    7. Re:I don't see how... by Cranx · · Score: 1

      Was American intelligence the best in the world when it came to the Bay of Pigs? Name one other agency that was gathering more and more accurate intelligence at that time.

      Intel gathering isn't a precise science, so finding chinks in the armor doesn't mean someone else out there MUST be better. The U.S. intel is the best, bar none. Not being perfect is not the same as not being the best. U.S. intel is the best, but it's not perfect. It's the least imperfect of all intelligence agencies out there. We know more about more people and things in the world with more accuracy than any other agency in the world.

      I don't say that because I blindly believe in U.S. intel. That's not my purpose with that. I say that because when I ponder the video game character threat, I need to make assumptions, and I want to make the most appropriate assumptions; the ones that make the most sense, not the ones that support a pre-conceived notion I have to believe that U.S. intel are a bunch of clowns.

      We have to make assumptions, but we should make the most SENSIBLE assumptions. It does not make sense to assume that the U.S. investigated a video game character in-depth and found him to be a real person, then google came along and corrected them. More likely, U.S. intel got a report somewhere about a video game character which was false, but very alarming, so they made it a priority to investigate, and early in the investigation the truth was discovered.

      The character reached the top of the matrix because he was reported and the report was scary, not investigated.

  41. Headhunter was ported to PS2 by xmurf · · Score: 1

    check here:

    http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/he ad hunter/

    and here:

    http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/product/217586.asp

    It's still an old game, but yes, it was brought to the US as a PS2 game.

  42. In other news by mbkennel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rumors among the jihadi-message boards say that Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri have started communicating to each other and their followers "in the open", under code names "Darth Sidious" and "Darth Maul".

    The National Security Agency said that comment it will not, but you mustn't underestimate the power of the Emperor.

  43. Funny, Not... by confused+one · · Score: 0

    I'd find this funny (as in ROFLOL) if it wasn't for the fact it cost the government money to produce and then disprove; AND, it took time away from the President, who, should have more important things to do...

    1. Re:Funny, Not... by jnicholson · · Score: 2, Funny
      First of all, it might have been a real group using obviously fake names to make the threat seem less real, and thus needed investigation.

      Second, anything that distracts shrub from coming up with more fun-and-games that turn into PR disasters in Iraq, is good.

      --
      "Do not drill any holes in your cat - it will not like it."
      -- Nick Davies
    2. Re:Funny, Not... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Finding the terrorist name to be a fictional character's *lowered* the threat level, so the ruse worked. Who were threats #2-4, Larry, Moe and Curly Stooge?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  44. Slashdot citing blogs again by Animats · · Score: 1

    Lame, really lame.

  45. So all you need to do is ... by TheGavster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So, it seems that all you need to do to get a terrorist plot ignored is to frame it with the plot from a popular videogame ...

    --
    "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
  46. contrarian... by moviepig.com · · Score: 4, Interesting
    (Swimming upstream to find a contrary perspective on this...)

    Consider the Pentagon folks who looked at this "threat" and suspected sagely (and rightly) that it was too fanciful to be credible.

    How closely do they resemble the Pentagon folks who, in early 2000, looked at jet-hijacking scenarios and suspected sagely (and wrongly) that they were too fanciful to be credible?

    (See answer in back of book.)

    --
    Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
    1. Re:contrarian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make any sense. The job of the national security guys is to anticipate possible attacks and monitor information which indicates that such an attack is going to happen. For instance, when you anticipate the use of airplanes as bombs, you can monitor pilot training programs and such.

      In this case (assuming the story is true), the problem is not that the Pentagon folks didn't anticipate a scenario. The problem is that nonsense information which can be cleared up with a bit of googling was taken so seriously. We know that one of the reasons why 9/11 wasn't prevented was because the intelligence agencies couldn't put 2 and 2 together. This is just another example of how they are unable to seperate the real threats from the bogey ones.

  47. Latest addition to axis of evil by Zareste · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fortunately, the FBI is spending millions of taxpayer dollars to buy entertainment systems for all their agents. Police are working round the clock to beat the game and defeat this criminal, the Bush administration is reinstating the draft to illuminate the threat, the government is commissioning programmers to build a ten-story Gameshark, and military units are already being convicted of abusing NPCs

    --
    I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
  48. You have no chance to survive by aflat362 · · Score: 1
    You have no chance to survive, make your time

    Upon learning that the threat was actually a harmless video game, all of the FBI agents sheepishly pulled their pants up from around their ankles.

    They then proceeded to bash the game because of all the harm it could cause in warping the children who play it.

    --

    Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart

  49. This happened before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a Whitehouse report a few decades back about a threat from some invaders, possibly from space. An alert staffer caught it at the last minute.

  50. In other news... by HaloZero · · Score: 5, Funny

    Law enforcement agencies all across the United States are searching for Tommy Vercetti. He is wanted for a string of felonies including (but not limited to) murder, assualt, battery, weapons sales, grand larceny, and above all else Grand Theft Auto.

    --
    Informatus Technologicus
    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tommy Vercetti is an innocent man.

    2. Re:In other news... by seen2much · · Score: 1

      And he did blow up the mall too. ( sure it was just one store but the media would say he blew up the whole mall.

      --


      "Beware the squirrels"
  51. Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Leave it to the extremists in charge of our nation to have their wettest dreams confirmed by...a Sega game. And a subpar game at that.

    People without moral or practical imagination--the types who have gutted our liberties with the Patriot Act, and led us to invade and torture Iraqis--exemplify the kind of simpleminded sorts who shouldn't be allowed to play M-rated video games.

    Or run governments.

    1. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by cybermace5 · · Score: 1

      Uh, am I living in some kind of alternate universe? The "extremists in charge" of a nation who "without moral or practical imagination" have "gutted liberties" and "invaded and tortured Iraqis" were removed from power in Iraq by American forces. Holy crap. You think that Saddam's removal means that Iraq is now under the control of a cruel and murderous government? Some retarded MPs made some really stupid choices, like many people do within our own borders due to the fact that they are sick freaks. The things that happened in pre-"invasion" Iraq were certainly more frequent and more deadly, and Saddam would never consider apologizing for any of it, since he fully approved.

      When George Bush has the residents of Minnesota systematically killed and bulldozed into mass graves, then I think we can start equating him with Saddam.

      --
      ...
    2. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by bonch · · Score: 1

      Congrulations on introducing completely unnecessary propaganda into a probably false article nobody has researched to check its validity.

      You even got "gutted our liberties with the Patriot Act" and "let us to invade and torture Iraqis" in there. Somehow, this has something to do with them not playing M-rated video games and running governments.

    3. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea but we should not be comparing ourselves to saddam, we should be held to the same standard as any western democracy. If you read more recent news, people are saying that this was far more widespread than it was first believed.

    4. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, in fact everything is just hunky-dory as long as it's N-1 [1] innocents harmed. Just keep repeating these and other talking points (such as your 'poor choices') and you'll be able to sleep at night, and if not there certainly is some drug^H^H^H^Hmedication from one of the pharmacutical conglomerate which is keeping our forces doped^H^H^H^H^Hon their toes.

      [1] N being the number affected by

    5. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrulations on introducing yet another completely unnecessary attempt to whore some karma.

      Go bonch!

      Only three more posts to go to make your daily quota!

    6. Re:Proof that video game ratings are necessary! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions... and you have the right to spew your commie peacenik propaganda, fine... but to say Headhunter was subpar?! What the fuck?! That game was awesome!

  52. More like government chose stupid by mozumder · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    It's not like the White House cares for any sort of accuracy... It's a steamroller for ineptitude.

    From How Bush Chose Stupidity:

    "The most obvious expression of Bush's choice of ignorance is that, at the age of 57, he knows nothing about policy or history."

    "A second, more damning aspect of Bush's mind-set is that he doesn't want to know anything in detail, however important."

    "Closely related to this aggressive ignorance is a third feature of Bush's mentality: laziness."

    "A fourth and final quality of Bush's mind is that it does not think. The president can't tolerate debate about issues. Offered an option, he makes up his mind quickly and never reconsiders."

    I'm surprised the White House isn't requesting $100 billion to fight this new threat to our national security. After all, if we can COMPLETELY make up a fear like potential weapons-of-mass-destruction....

  53. That threat is nothing by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
    decided to Google for information on suspected threat Don Emilio Fulci

    Wait until they find out that Don Michael Corleone is making a move to control the world's largest shipping company International Immobiliare.

    They can't allow the majority of the worlds ships to be controlled ny a figure liket that.

  54. All your Iraq are belong to U.S. by macshune · · Score: 5, Funny

    While I won't say whether I agree with the war or not, a spontaneous parody is definitely in order.

    In A.D. 2003
    War was beginning.

    Saddam: What happen?
    Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
    Operator: We get signal
    Saddam: What!
    Operator: Main screen turn on.
    Captain: It's you! We met in the '80s!
    RUMSFELD: How are you gentlemen!!
    RUMSFELD: All your Iraq are belong to U.S.
    RUMSFELD: We are on the way to your weapons of mass destruction.
    Saddam: What you say!!
    RUMSFELD: You have no chance to survive make your time.
    RUMSFELD: Ha Ha Ha Ha...

    1. Re:All your Iraq are belong to U.S. by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's been done before. (Like any parody except "All your baked potato taste like peanut butter" hasn't been done....)

      In A.D. 2001
      war was beginning.
      ARAB: What happen ?
      ARAB 2: Somebody set up us the bomb.
      ARAB 3: We get signal.
      SADDAM: What !
      ARAB 3: Main screen turn on.
      SADDAM: It's you !!
      GWB: How are you gentlemen !!
      GWB: All your no fly zone are belong to us.
      GWB: You are on the way to destruction.
      SADDAM: What you say !!
      GWB: You have no chance to survive make your time.
      GWB: Ha ha ha ha ....
      SADDAM: Take off every 'MiG'!!
      SADDAM: You know what you doing.
      SADDAM: Move 'MiG'.
      SADDAM: For great Allah.

    2. Re:All your Iraq are belong to U.S. by macshune · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that was pretty funny. Yeah, it's like mine, but they went further and included the launch every zig part, obviously. Probably spent more than 2 minutes on it too, as they managed to replace every "Captain" with "Saddam" unlike myself.

    3. Re:All your Iraq are belong to U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously dude- fuck yourself. Shut the fuck up. Fuck you.

    4. Re:All your Iraq are belong to U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yours was better. Definitely deserves a 5, I busted a gut.

  55. The E Ring? by Toirdhealbhach · · Score: 1

    What is the E Ring?

    1. Re:The E Ring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      The E-Ring is the outermost ring in the Pentagon. Since all the offices with views are there, that's also where you'll find the heavy hitters in the DoD. Just as "seventh floor" is Washingtonspeak for high-level political appointees, "E Ring" is milspeak for the top brass.

      - Watchful Babbler

  56. Moderators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this isn't an April fools, maybe the parent should be insightful, not funny.

  57. This is NOTHING compared... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to the Pong Fiasco of 83 when the US spent billions of black budget funds on a useless anti-pixel defense system.

  58. maybe they "Ask Jeeves" by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
    HERE is the link, notice the second result, LOL.

    However, following the link doesn't yield much else

  59. and so begins the era of Information Pollution... by Phoenixhunter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Arthur C. Clarke got it right for once ;)

  60. TIA refund please. by twitter · · Score: 2, Funny
    So, billions of dollars later, this is what we can expect from Total Information Awareness? I'll bet a nickle that this floated up their system from being automatically gathered off people's computers and web pages. Enough hits made it right! I want a refund, my privacy back and for those morons to quit thinking that they can prevent crimes by reading my email, browsing and text on my computer.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:TIA refund please. by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Save you indignation until after we come to a collective realization that the trillions of dollars spend on Missile defense and the War on Drugs were also a giant waste of money. In some sense, worse than a waste of money. Cracking down on drugs simply made the profit margin insane. Going off and actively researching missile defense involved shredding a few disarmerment treaties with the Russians (not to mention pissing them off.)

      Back on the subject, information by it's very definition is measured by it's surprise. The approach taken by the TIA should really be called the "Total Data Awareness." They think that by viewing massive quantities of the ordinary will reveal the extraordinary.

      They forget that databases can't file the extraordinary. All of the tips, leads, and missed clues were people noticing that something didn't jive, something didn't fit. Computers can't do that. At least not unaided.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  61. Well I've found the... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...WMD.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  62. Slashdot has been trolled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAND, Simoniker!

  63. -1, manhunt != headhunt by nacturation · · Score: 1

    Doh! Ignore this... next time I'll learn to read. :)

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  64. competence by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The alternative is to eliminate nonsense threats, like videogame villains, before they top the threat matrix. That's what security professionals do. Apparently not what the BushCo incompetents do. You trusted them on September 11, 2001, you trust them now, don't be surprised when you get screwed again.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:competence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, you should just look right past those rules and regulations that bitch on the 9/11 committee made.

    2. Re:competence by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Funny

      Anonymous Ashcroft Coward, your non-sequitur implies that some kind of FBI/CIA "wall" of noncooperation prevents the Dep't of Homeland Security from ruling out cartoons as top terror threats. And you moreover repeat the ridiculous lie from the Justice Department that there's even a "wall" at all, or that Gorelick created one. Where do you get this crap from? Why do you hate America? You hide behind your Anonymous Cowardice like some chickenshit terrorist programmer brainwashing a kid to detonate in a pizza parlor. Why do you hate America?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:competence by Trepalium · · Score: 1

      On one hand, I'm somewhat offended by the tone you took. On the other hand, I'm surprised you made effective use of the Bushian 'everyone who doesn't agree with me is a terrorist'. And on the third hand, it truely illustrates how ridiculous the situation has become. I'm in awe.

      --
      I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    4. Re:competence by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What tone, spite of an anonymous crap spewer undermining even the mild investigation of the 9/11 committee? Why does that offend you? And where's that "everyone who doesn't agree with me is a terrorist" that surprised you? Where I compared an anonymous manipulator of lies to their terrorist ilk, with the same modus operandi? They both dump venom into the media, designed to disrupt the civilized process of truth and security, and hardly comprise "everyone who doesn't agree with me". Nor did I call the poster a terrorist, but rather compared them to a terrorist programmer.

      There's nothing ridiculous about today's catastrophic state of affairs. Marginal terrorists have tipped our incompetent criminal government into taking us all down a doomed path. Moronic partisans anonymously snipe at even the broken system's feeble mockups of justice. And righteously angry criticism of their collective guilt offends people who exagerrate fine points into meaningless strawman gibberish. Pay attention - it's your country that's collapsing under its weight of incompetence, taking us all along for the ride down.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:competence by Trepalium · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually, it's not my country, but that's beside the point. I still have to live in this same world, after all. I guess I didn't make this clear, but don't think I disagree with you. I was simply taken back by your hostility and anger towards the AC.

      Now, my only point was the sheer level of hostility in your post, combined with some use of the retoric (the T-word and implying the anon poster was anti-american) of the pro-Bush, 'My Country Right or Wrong', camp was inspiring. IMO, it illustrates how meaningless those words have become. That people's opinions are discounted by simply calling them 'Unpatriotic' because they dare question the government.

      Now, what I find ridiculous about this situation is the two sides of the war. Anti-Bush people who can seem to be unable to criticize anything about Bush except for his intelligence (or lack thereof), and the pro-Bush people who criticize anyone who doesn't agree with Bush as unpatriotic. They've become caricatures all to themselves. How can anyone take either side seriously, I wonder.

      Since I'm a Canadian citizen, I can laugh off most silly charges of me being Anti-American. Frankly it's neither an insult or a complement to me. I have even been told that I have no right to speak on these topics. Even throughout the Maher Arar deportation by US authorities (perhaps with the Canadian government's blessings) to Syria to be tortured, some people maintained that no one had the right to say anything about this except for the US government. Can't break this glass house they live in, or the entire world they live in might come crumbling down.

      I have my doubts about the justice that Maher will get with the inquiry about his case that's going on. After all, what can you really expect when the RCMP raid a reporter's house after she dug up some secret documents on the case.

      --
      I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    6. Re:competence by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I'm angry about the inverted rhetoric from those who back Bush, validating his theft of the 2000 election, and everything else he's touched since (and before, too, but that was Texas' problem). I gleefully turn the Bushit "why do you hate America?" ray on their horde of zombies whenever it's appropriate: Homeland Security plays the fool in a videogame threat fiasco, some Bush apologist says Homeland Security competence is too hard, I call them on their baby talk, an AC picks up the excuse to repeat Ashcroft's guilt evasion lies about a "wall" created by a Democrat 9/11 Commission member, and I call them on their lowly undermining of even the feeble commission's minimal integrity. Believing that Ashcroft's FBI was blocked by Gorelick's memo requires a prejudice in lockstep with Ashcroft's agenda, which is to weaken the US government until (nightmarish, but true) Bush's faith organizations can completely take over.

      I take these rightwing zealots, selling out the Constitution along with American global & domestic security (military, economic, diplomatic, the gamut), very seriously. They're winning! I understand the Canadian reluctance to engage conflict (I lived there for several happy years) in favor of cooperation. But that's not an option in the midst of a civil counterrevolution, rolling back all the gains in human/civil/consumer rights of the past century.

      I live in New York City. We got planebombed in the opening salvo of an insane rightwing campaign to lock up the 2000 coup, and roll troops wherever it suits their agenda, at an unbelievable cost in lives, American power, money, and every other measure available. New Yorkers learn that to win, we must beat the other guy - and assume that if they start with the upper hand, and have nothing to lose, that they must be beaten to death. We have done very well by that approach. Even living Canadian for several years hasn't cured me of that. And you might even be thankful for that kind of matchup, because we, and others like us, are all that's standing between you and annexation by BushCo for your tar sands and fresh water. If you think that's crazy, you should probably look into the German justifications for annexing Czechoslovokia.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    7. Re:competence by Mekkis · · Score: 1

      *stands up*


      *applauds*


      VERY well-put. Not much else I can say except that.

    8. Re:competence by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Now reasonable defense of appropriate vehemence is "Flamebait". If so, where are all the flames? Moderate with a point, not mod points, anonymous censorious moderators.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  65. Also on the threat matrix... by s88 · · Score: 1

    I also heard that there was a lot of talk about an upcoming Revolution November of last year. But it turned out that there was absolutely no story, and it was nothing but a bunch of special effects.

    1. Re:Also on the threat matrix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahaha, nicely done. I applaud you.

  66. PARENT = ANTI-SLASH.ORG TROLL, PLZ MOD DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    K THX!

  67. National Security Threats by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Come on folks, don't be naive. Just because this guy is a video game character does not make him any less a threat to national security. Do we really need another 9/11-style attack before we wake up? Remember after 9/11 when it turned out that the Sesame Street character Bert (of Ernie and Bert) was working closely with Osama bin Laden? Now I don't know a lot about this Don Emilio guy but I will feel much safer when he is locked away in Guantanamo, or at least huddling in a cave in Pakistan somewhere taunting us with audio tapes while American bombs explode nearby....

    1. Re:National Security Threats by andr0meda · · Score: 1


      Or perhaps the Guantanamo prisoners have thought of this evil scheme to smuggle in video games to ameliorate their housing conditions.

      --
      With great power comes great electricity bills.
    2. Re:National Security Threats by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Or you could just take away the power cord.

      --
      What?
  68. That almost would have been funny... by ebbomega · · Score: 1

    Had they not already used the AYB reference in the summary.

    --
    Karma: Non-Heinous
  69. This reminds me of the Steve Jackson Games case by Infonaut · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Way back (way back!) in 1990, Steve Jackson Games roused the ire of the US Secret Service for making a pencil and paper RPG called Cyberpunk, which was supposedly a handbook for computer crime. Never mind the fact that the game took place in a speculative future, SJG was raided. Thus began a legal wrangle that involved the nascent Electronic Frontier Foundation and sparked a much wider discussion about electronic civil liberties.

    In the process of fighting the Secret Service, even with help from the EFF, Steve Jackson Games almost went under.

    BTW, I'm not saying that the Steve Jackson case is the same as the FBI's current screw-up. But law enforcement makes mistakes, and sometimes they make big mistakes because they're simply not clued in to popular culture, not to mention computer technology as it is actually used in society.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  70. Dupe post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Funny that the parent should choose "we were trolled" as the topic.

    Is it really necessary to mod the exact same post from the same person up to +5 TWICE IN THE SAME NEWS STORY?

    1. Re:Dupe post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unfortunately 'slash' (the code that slashdot runs on) does not support moving of posts. While I had already posted that elsewhere, it fit better here. And it wasn't +5 on either post. -J

  71. Parent Redundant in title alone, post original. by macshune · · Score: 1

    The title might be redundant but the post is original and has never been written before because I just wrote it.

  72. Et tu, Steve? by MiceHead · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Steve Jackson Games' venerable story on how the US Secret Service raided them (and was subsequently forced to pay damages) is a good read, for those who've heard of the case, but are not familiar with the details.

    On March 1 1990, the offices of Steve Jackson Games, in Austin, Texas, were raided by the U.S. Secret Service as part of a nationwide investigation of data piracy... More than three years later, a federal court awarded damages and attorneys' fees to the game company...

    The EFF also has a Top Ten most mis-reported elements of the case:

    10. Steve Jackson Games is a computer game company.
    9. GURPS Cyberpunk is a computer game.
    8. We're out of business.
    7. We were raided by the FBI.
    6. Some of our staff members were arrested by the Secret Service and charged with hacking.
    5. This was part of Operation Sun Devil.
    4. The raid was after GURPS Cyberpunk.
    3. There was a hacker threat to sabotage the 911 system.
    2. We have an employee named Lloyd Blankenship.
    1. Steve Jackson Games is the second largest game company in the USA.
    This instance with Sega's fictional character, though embarassing for the FBI, is certainly preferable to the above.
    _________________________
    I long for the day when Google stops asking me, "Did you mean: inigo rage"
  73. What am I missing here? by unperson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    An FBI employee recieves a detailed tip about some immenent terrorist threat. Instead of researching first, he makes a calculated judgement that since a specific threat was mentioned, he *might* just go ahead and send the info up and down the pipeline so people can be alert...after all, wouldn't it have been better to have a national bulletin that said "Immeninent attack!" at about 6:00am EST on 9/11/01 than to have a detailed summary four hours later!?

    I just don't see how we should be upset about the handling of this event. Yes, its kind of funny. The linked article seems to indicate that everything happened in the timeframe of one day. I mean, don't tell me you expected this guy to recognize some character from a video game?

  74. So, terrorists just need to pollute Google? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So, if I am a terrorist, all I have to do is have my name come up under some video game, or other innocuous topic [like slashdot postings] more often than fringe websites and usenet groups, and I'm free and clear with the Feds?

    heh, that will throw them off the trail. lol

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    1. Re:So, terrorists just need to pollute Google? by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, call yourself Darl bin McBride of Al'Sco, and everyone will ignore you. Or pay you $699. Either way you win. After all, only the real McBride is going to court.

  75. Bad intel? by Game+Genie · · Score: 1

    I recall a 007 movie in which M jokes about the US getting inteligence from CNN, but this is absurd!

    -

    1. Re:Bad intel? by BoneFlower · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, the US does get intelligence from CNN. CNN is actualy very good at ferreting out information other civilian organizations can't get, and often manages to get information before most of the US gets it... the Marines who went ashore in Somalia damn near killed a CNN camera crew that was there to greet them.

  76. And this is a problem? by Black+Cardinal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the (extremely brief) article it sounds like the system put in place to evaluate threats worked. A potential threat was identified somehow, then dismissed once it was turned out to be a nonthreat. Its not like any action beyond evaluation was taken. Even if the "potential threat" in this case was a videogame character, I would prefer to have a human being make that call then let some automated search engine do the screening based on some rules. Whatever automated system they are using is probably only designed to identify potential threats, not evaluate them.

  77. Re:"says no such thing" ?!? by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meanwhile, the real Don Emilio Fulci is laughing his ass off in his secret lair. "All it took was a few million dollars in bribes at Sega to have myself added to a video game, then a careful leak to the FBI. Now no US government agent will dare to say that he suspects Emilio Fulci. BWAHAHAHA!" :^)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  78. title should be... by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    "FBI in Lala Land"

    Maybe Homeland Security should recruit Max Payne, Duke Nukem, the guy in Doom, the CT team from Counterstrike, and maybe even Sonic the Hedgehog.

    Although it may be funny in hindsight, it's scare to note that our intell is that bad. Maybe we need to stop spending money on "studies" and other bull and use them to get good reliable informants and good googlers.

  79. Imminent Threat by copponex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, the questions were:

    1. Does Iraq have weapons of mass destruction that can be used against the United States?

    2. Is Iraq planning to use those weapons?

    As is plainly evident, even to the man the Bush Administration hired to find the weapons couldn't find them, and I've seen no document saying that Iraq was planning an attack.

    I think we all remember Colin Powell circling some stuff on a map, and then holding up a vial saying, "They have this here." Well, where the did "here" go?

    What about North Korea? They actually have a nuclear program, and a dictator who has directly threatened the US. What about Saudi Arabia, where 15 of the 19 hijackers came from, and home to bin Laden and many terrorist organizations funded by the Saudi Government?

    Bush doesn't have any balls. He'll attack a country that has virtually no defense (Afghanistan) or a country that we've been bombing for 10 years (Iraq), but not so much as cut diplomatic ties with the nation that 80% of the 911 terrorists originated from (Saudi Arabia).

    I don't think Bush is evil, but he is incompetent and short sighted. Not too great of a choice for President.

    1. Re:Imminent Threat by cheezedawg · · Score: 2, Insightful
      1. Does Iraq have weapons of mass destruction that can be used against the United States?

      He had weapons. The world told him to show proof that he had disarmed. He didn't. The only safe assumption a Commander in Chief could make based on that evidence is that he still has the weapons. Anthrax just does not dissappear, after all.

      2. Is Iraq planning to use those weapons?

      Sometimes I wonder if people are listening to the same President Bush. Both Bush and Blair were very clear that we must act BEFORE Iraq can plan to use the weapons- BEFORE they became an immenent threat. Its too late to act if he already has a gun pointed at our head. Iraq has known terrorist connections- they have been on the State Dept list of Terror Sponsering States for 15 years. We should have acted against that threat a lot sooner than we did.

      What about North Korea?

      Unlike North Korea,

      Iraq was in violation of 17 Chapter VII UN resolutions as well as the cease-fire from the first Gulf War that required them to disarm

      Iraq had shown that they are willing to use their WMDs

      Iraq had just tried to illegally expand their borders

      Iraq is sitting on some of the richest natural resources in the world to finance almost anything that they would like.

      There is still a lot of diplomacy that the world can try in North Korea.

      What about Saudi Arabia, where 15 of the 19 hijackers came from, and home to bin Laden and many terrorist organizations funded by the Saudi Government?

      McVeigh was from New York- should we invade New York also? At least Saudi Arabia revoked bin Laden's citizenship. Unless maybe you have some special insider knowledge about the Saudi Royal family?

      Bush doesn't have any balls.

      I am glad that the man in charge of protecting our national security DOES have the balls to act when necessary.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    2. Re:Imminent Threat by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Hush now, you're making too much sense. That can be confudling to alot of people. Good post, if I had any mod points left today I would have modded that up. Instead, I'll give my voice in support.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Imminent Threat by copponex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He had weapons.
      In the early nineties, sure. And then nearly all of it was destroyed, correct? By the U.N.? Did he a) have weapons in 2003 and b) directly threatened the United States, and did he c) have the technological capability to achieve that threat?

      The world told him to show proof that he had disarmed. He didn't. The only safe assumption a Commander in Chief could make based on that evidence is that he still has the weapons. Anthrax just does not dissappear, after all.
      So, if I ask Cuba to show me proof that it has no military capability to attack the US, and they don't comply, my only option is to invade the country?

      Sometimes I wonder if people are listening to the same President Bush.
      I heard he can talk even when Cheney drinks water.

      Both Bush and Blair were very clear that we must act BEFORE Iraq can plan to use the weapons- BEFORE they became an immenent threat. Its too late to act if he already has a gun pointed at our head.
      Owning a gun is not a crime. Pointing it at someone is. Or, does this only apply to oil-bearing nations?

      Iraq has known terrorist connections- they have been on the State Dept list of Terror Sponsering States for 15 years. We should have acted against that threat a lot sooner than we did.
      Here are the others on that list: Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria. How many of those countries were involved in the 9-11 attacks? Oh, that's right - none. Something tells me we need a new list.

      Iraq was in violation of 17 Chapter VII UN resolutions as well as the cease-fire from the first Gulf War that required them to disarm. Iraq had shown that they are willing to use their WMDs.
      Sounds like a UN problem to me. We acted unilaterally because? And they had used WMDs on foreigners when? I mean, besides the Iran war where the Reagan Administration trained them and sold them their first WMDs.

      If I remember correctly, a nation is allowed to do whatever it wants inside it's own borders. Little thing those "big-time reporters" call sovereignty.

      Iraq had just tried to illegally expand their borders...
      Which threatened the US in what way?

      Iraq is sitting on some of the richest natural resources in the world to finance almost anything that they would like.
      Again, if you find the pieces needed to make a bomb inside my house - like alcohol, fertilizer, and household cleaners - it doesn't mean that I'm going to make a bomb. If you find plans to make one, and a hit list, and a preperation area, then you can arrest me for conspiring. You can't kill people if they have "the ability to conspire." It's too vague, and basically is a license to kill anyone the government doesn't like.

      McVeigh was from New York- should we invade New York also? At least Saudi Arabia revoked bin Laden's citizenship. Unless maybe you have some special insider knowledge about the Saudi Royal family?
      Well, if fifteen people from New York City area were involved, I'd want some action from the NYPD. The Saudis did not see a single bad word out of Bush's mouth. They revoked bin Laden's citizenship in 1994, not after 9-11. After 9-11, not a single person in Saudi Arabia was arrested and delivered to the US. Is it your belief that the only people from Saudi Arabia involved in the attacks were the original 15?

      I am glad that the man in charge of protecting our national security DOES have the balls to act when necessary.
      Iraq, besides the two Gulf wars, has killed zero US Citizens. Al Queda killed 3,000, and so far, in a year of occupation, no document has linked Al Queda and the old Iraqi government. Saudi Arabia didn't receive so much as a slap on the wrists.

      Bush has the balls to look like he has balls, but that's about it.

    4. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So, if I ask Cuba to show me proof that it has no military capability to attack the US, and they don't comply, my only option is to invade the country?

      This really doesn't seem that unreasonable, you know. Considering all they would have to do is let some Americans into their country and look at things.

    5. Re:Imminent Threat by nfgaida · · Score: 1

      Well made points.

      --
      *elevator music plays*
    6. Re:Imminent Threat by cheezedawg · · Score: 1

      Sorry- this post is really long.

      In the early nineties, sure. And then nearly all of it was destroyed, correct?

      Some of it certainly was. Some more was used against the Kurds. Some more has lost its potency and become useless. But there is still more that cannot be accounted for.

      By the U.N.?

      One of the problems with the weapons inspectors is that Saddam claimed to have destroyed a lot of weapons unilaterally in the spring/summer of 1991, so the inspectors were left with the task of trying to prove those claims after the fact.

      Did he a) have weapons in 2003

      Given his track record, the only reasonable assumption was that he did.

      b) directly threatened the United States, and did he c) have the technological capability to achieve that threat?

      Once again, Iraq has never posed a direct threat to us. The motivations for invading were to prevent them from becoming a direct threat, and to eliminate the indirect threat of his weapons getting into the hands of some of the terrorist organizations that he supported.

      So, if I ask Cuba to show me proof that it has no military capability to attack the US, and they don't comply, my only option is to invade the country?

      Cuba is not under international orders to disarm with an authorization to use military force to get them to comply, and Cuba has not shown a willingness to use WMDs in the past.

      Owning a gun is not a crime.

      It is if the UN Security Council has passed 17 unanimous resolutions ordering you to disarm.

      Here are the others on that list: Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria. How many of those countries were involved in the 9-11 attacks? Oh, that's right - none. Something tells me we need a new list.

      We are at war against terrorism, not just al Qaeda. Terrorist organizations cannot easily survive without the support of states like those on that list. Incedentally, it looks like Libya might make it off that list soon here because they realized that Bush does have balls.

      Sounds like a UN problem to me.

      EXACTLY. The UNSEC passed 17 freaking resolutions over 12 years under chapter VII of the UN charter, but they were unwilling to take the steps mandated to enforce them.

      We acted unilaterally because?

      Because we don't have to wait for France's approval to eliminate a threat to our national security.

      And they had used WMDs on foreigners when?

      The fact that he had used them showed that he did not care about international law. Same with his invasion of Kuwait.

      besides the Iran war where the Reagan Administration trained them and sold them their first WMDs.

      The chemical weapons he has used in Iran did not come from us. They came from either Japan or Germany.

      Again, if you find the pieces needed to make a bomb inside my house... it doesn't mean that I'm going to make a bomb.

      Analogies like that are always so inadequate, but I'll try to work with it. If you had made and used bombs in the past, associated with gang members that carried out bombings, and constantly refused to cooperate with authorities trying to figure out if you have any bombs, and you do this for 12 YEARS, then that is something to be worried about.

      Saudis did not see a single bad word out of Bush's mouth.

      Again- do you have any special evidence that Bush doesn't have that the Saudi's conspired or planned or otherwise had anything to do with 9-11?

      Iraq, besides the two Gulf wars, has killed zero US Citizens. Al Queda killed 3,000, and so far, in a year of occupation, no document has linked Al Queda and the old Iraqi government

      There are circumstantial links, but that is irrelevant. We are at war with terrorism, not just al Qaeda, and there is plenty of evidence that Iraq supported terrorists.

      Saudi Arabia didn't receive so much as a slap on the wrists.

      For what?

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    7. Re:Imminent Threat by CptSparrow · · Score: 1

      Owning a gun is not a crime. Pointing it at someone is. Or, does this only apply to oil-bearing nations?

      This falls under the category of trying to expmand their borders. That's the same as pointing that gun at someone. And how did that threaten the U.S.? Not directly, no. But, it did threaten the U.S. allies, and like it or not, the U.S. has become the "police force" of the world, and like it or not, we do depend on those oil producing countries.

      If I remember correctly, a nation is allowed to do whatever it wants inside it's own borders. Little thing those "big-time reporters" call sovereignty.

      Very True, but keep in mind, this was one man doing whatever he wants, not the nation. For the most part the Iraqi people are glad to be rid of him. It's just now that they are, they want to be left alone. It's the same reason the allies didn't just chase Hitler back into Germany and say "play in your own sandbox now."

      Well, if fifteen people from New York City area were involved, I'd want some action from the NYPD.

      I'd be happy with action from them with just the one person involved (not saying they didn't). And appropriate action mind you.

      Al Queda killed 3,000, and so far, in a year of occupation, no document has linked Al Queda and the old Iraqi government. Saudi Arabia didn't receive so much as a slap on the wrists.

      For that matter, a number of countries known to support the group have been left alone. Regardless of your stance, this can't be seen as anything other than a political move.

    8. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now any country with WMDs can say that the US is an imminent threat on them. Pre-emtive strike is the only option other wise the US will attack and we know they don't care if you still have the WMDs or not so it is no use destroying them.

    9. Re:Imminent Threat by sterno · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1) Actually, many of the weapons he had do just dissapear. Many of the nerve toxins, etc, will degrade over time.

      2) As for an imminent threat, Saddam was never a threat, imminent or otherwise.

      Time for a little lesson about the concept of mutually assured destruction. The lesson that should have been learned from 9/11 that was not, was that non-state actors can be a serious threat to our country. Saddam has one motivating interest, his own power.

      Let's assume, for the moment, that he got himself some nukes, and some how got the ability to deliver them to New York. Like really high tech deliver so that he could track the delivery and see who signed for it. What would he do with it? He can't use them against us because we would wipe him out. He can't use them against any enemies in the area, we would wipe him out. The only thing that they do is keep us from going for the throat when attacking him.

      What's that you say? He might have given the weapons to Al Qaeda? Well I'll skip the fact that Al Qaeda hates him, and get to the simple point that it would be fantastically stupid. Let's say he gave the weapons to Al Qaeda and they used them on the US. What then? Remember how well that sort of shit worked out for the Taliban? Hell, the Taliban screwed up so bad that Saddam got dragged in when he had NOTHING to do with it.

      We can afford to wait til he points a gun if we know where he is and we can match his gun with a bazooka.

      3) "Iraq has known terrorist connections- they have been on the State Dept list of Terror Sponsering States for 15 years." They are at best a retirement home for a few terrorists. The closest they've come to a terrorist attack was a terribly bungled assassination attempt of Bush Sr. Their intelligence service is, notoriously, one of the least effective in the world.

      As for the state sponsors of terrorism list, it's utter hogwash. Cuba's on that list. When was the last time they tried to engage in terrorism. The US has conducted more terrorism in Cuba than they have here.

      4) "Iraq had just tried to illegally expand their borders" Well, north korea can't really do that since the only borders they have to expand into are China, their only friend, and South Korea, who we back. This would get back into that mutually assured destruction concept I mentioned earlier.

      5) "Iraq is sitting on some of the richest natural resources in the world to finance almost anything that they would like" Not if the rest of the world refuses to sell anything to them.

      6) As to the state of Bush's cojones, I've got no argument. But frankly I'd like to have a president with the brains to keep his cojones in check. Serial killers have cajones. The 9/11 terrorists had cajones. Cajones are a dangerous thing without a little bit of logic and reason.

      --
      This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    10. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      "do you have any special evidence that Bush doesn't have that the Saudi's conspired or planned or otherwise had anything to do with 9-11?"

      you can hardly appeal to the forthright nature of the most secretive administration in decades to let you know exactly what evidence it does and does not have. come on... ...and also consider how fucking absolutely wrong that administration has been, making misleading and false statements, swearing up and down (but not under oath) that they're true...

      in short, *we know* that the bush administration is not above a little lying. and i'm horrified that so many people seem to be ok with this - even if he has done exactly the right things, taken the right actions, i still can't vote for someone that's willing to present a fabrication to both the international community and their own citizens... while saying it's true, we "know" it, and may God fucking bless all our little lives.

    11. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah.... so he had to show proof that he had no WMDs. But wasn't that what the weapon inspections were for? And they didn't find any.

      Then the war. Were any of those WMDs used during the war? The US et al waltzed in. Where were the WMDs. If Iraq posed an immediate threat, why wasn't the USA attacked during this time?

      And surely the Iraqi's had reasonable cause to believe that the US was an immenent threat to them. When the son of the guy who attacked you first time round gets voted in, this has to worry you.

    12. Re:Imminent Threat by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I wonder if people are listening to the same President Bush. Both Bush and Blair were very clear that we must act BEFORE Iraq can plan to use the weapons- BEFORE they became an immenent threat. Its too late to act if he already has a gun pointed at our head. Iraq has known terrorist connections- they have been on the State Dept list of Terror Sponsering States for 15 years. We should have acted against that threat a lot sooner than we did.

      Well, it's really too bad Iraq didn't have nukes, otherwise we wouldn't have invaded. I'll restate your entire paragraph in slightly older historical terms, and then I have a question for you.

      Sometimes I wonder if people are listening to the same President JFK. Both JFK and (Margaret Thatcher?) were very clear that we must act BEFORE the Soviets can plan to use the weapons- BEFORE they became an immenent threat. Its too late to act if they already has a gun pointed at our head. The Soviet Union has known terrorist connections- they have been on the State Dept list of Terror Sponsering States for 15 years. We should have acted against that threat a lot sooner than we did.

      So the question is, when it is ok and when it is not ok to be a first strike nation? What specific qualifications would you offer on when it is ok to attack a nation?

      I'll take the tension of the Cuban Missile Crisis over wiping out an entire nation for fear of them getting nukes. At least the CMC can be understood, and it can clearly be seen how both sides acted well, and acted to save face for each other, and acted in the interest of peace, even if the MAD philosophy is a bit on the crazy side. I'd wager that if Saddam was after nukes, he wasn't after them to fire at anybody (that would be pretty dumb, and he's not *that* dumb). He was after them to keep us from invading him, as a deterrant, just like the Soviets' nukes, and more than likely just like North Korea's nukes now. Sure, they're crazy, but it doesn't take a whole lot of brainpower to figure out that unless you have a whole bunch of nukes, the development of nukes is not going to allow you to use them. THe first nation that launches nukes at somebody is going to get so totally blasted to hell (either nuclear or with conventional weapons) that it'll take a lot more than craziness to launch them.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    13. Re:Imminent Threat by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cuba is not under international orders to disarm with an authorization to use military force to get them to comply, and Cuba has not shown a willingness to use WMDs in the past.

      Man, oh man, is history ever repeating itself. The only difference is that there isn't a superpower opposite the US in polarity to help out Iraq. What we just did in Iraq we would have gladly done to Cuba in 1960. In fact, we tried it. Then Cuba got some nukes from the Soviet Union, and what happened?

      That's right, we couldn't pick on them any longer.

      I'm so glad you mentioned Cuba, WMDs and so forth. We made invasion noises at Cuba immediately after Castro showed up, very similar to how we've been making invasion noises at Iraq for some time. Of course Saddam was looking for some way to deter us from invading his country.

      Now, I'm not trying to take Saddam's side in this, I just don't think Bush should've gone in there so soon. I would have preferred giving the poor dictator more rope to hang himself with. Running around like a chicken with its head cut off is a good way to get the US in some pretty deep shit, and I'd prefer it if our president would cut it out. Also, running around trying to invade every nation for "fear of terrorism" is in fact a symptom that we have already lost the war against terror. Yep, we've already lost. We're scared shitless and firing our guns at anything that moves.

      Take the red off the Texas flag Bush claims, apparently we don't have any bravery anymore.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    14. Re:Imminent Threat by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

      "Owning a gun is not a crime. Pointing it at someone is." In most countries, it is a crime to own a gun without proper registration. Also, the consequence of "pointing" with WMD could mean hundreds of millions of people dead, not just one or two.

      Also, you should know that countries illegally expanding their borders is a threat to world security (look at israel..)

    15. Re:Imminent Threat by mihib · · Score: 1

      No. 5 is the only reason for occupying Iraq.
      Because it's rich of natural resources (aka Oil).
      Isn't Bush descendend of a Oil-Dealing family? Oh what a coincidence.

    16. Re:Imminent Threat by grozzie2 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The chemical weapons he has used in Iran did not come from us. They came from either Japan or Germany.

      The chemical weapons used in iran came in 2 forms. The first form was aerial delivery. American supplied chemicals were delivered from american supplied helicopters, originally justified as 'crop dusters'. The second form came as mortar shells. American made chemical shells were fired from german made mortars. The german supplier of the mortars brokered and acted as middle man in the purchase of the shells for those mortars.

      Another interesting 'point of interest', there were WMD used during gulf war 2nd edition. They came in the form of anti tank shells made up of depleted uranium, and there is a considerable inventory of those things in iraq today. They are american made, and in use by the american military. Thier radioactive nature has them officially qualified as WMD by the UN doctrines that define such things.

      So, it's actually quite easy to find WMD in iraq today, just go look in the munitions supply at all the american locations holding any significant number of tanks.

      But, the hypocracy of this whole thing really starts to show now. The american forces in iraq are holding Saddam on various and sundry charges, things like his jailors would torture and kill prisoners. The shoe is on the other foot now, still waiting to see GW in jail cuz his jailors are torturing prisoners. As they say, what's good for the goose...

    17. Re:Imminent Threat by cheezedawg · · Score: 2, Funny
      The chemical weapons used in iran came in 2 forms.

      From the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
      The absence in the sample analysed in Sweden and Switzerland of polysulphides and of more than a trace of sulphur indicates that it is not of past US-government manufacture, for all US mustard was made by the Levinstein process from ethylene and mixed sulphur chlorides. That process is also said to have been the one used by the USSR. From similar reasoning, British-made mustard, too, can probably be ruled out, even though substantial stocks were once held at British depots in the Middle East.
      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    18. Re:Imminent Threat by cheezedawg · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm so glad you mentioned Cuba, WMDs and so forth. We made invasion noises at Cuba immediately after Castro showed up, very similar to how we've been making invasion noises at Iraq for some time. Of course Saddam was looking for some way to deter us from invading his country.

      The UNSEC unanimously voted 17 times under chapter VII of the UN resolution that Iraq needed to be disarmed. The same can not (and could not) be said about Cuba.

      Now, I'm not trying to take Saddam's side in this, I just don't think Bush should've gone in there so soon.

      So soon? It took 12 freakin years! We also waited 14 months after President Bush included them in the "Axis of Evil". At any point during that time Iraq could have started to cooperate, but they never did. How long to you think we should wait???

      we have already lost the war against terror

      What? In 2003, terrorism was at its lowest level since 1969. I'd call that some progress in the war against terror.

      --
      "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
    19. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saddam did cooperate with the UN, but of course this information never reached the US public. The UN even had weapons inspectors there to do the impossible task of proving that those weapons no longer exist - which is kind of like proving that UFOs don't exist - and were met with cooperation from Iraqi officials. They were doing well, apart from the times when they had to leave the country because the US was threatening to bomb the country, and they were close to finishing their investigations.

    20. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and like it or not, the U.S. has become the "police force" of the world

      From a european point of view, the US has become the criminal of the world. You may still view yourselves as a police force, but you won't find many with that viewpoint outside your own borders - well, excluding Blairs bedroom.

    21. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anthrax just does not dissappear, after all.

      Yes it does. Liquid anthrax breaks down in three years.

    22. Re:Imminent Threat by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 0

      Sometimes I wonder if people are listening to the same President Bush.
      I heard he can talk even when Cheney drinks water.


      I thought this bit needed highlighting :P

      --
      TIAEAE!
    23. Re:Imminent Threat by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      The fact that he had used them showed that he did not care about international law. Same with his invasion of Kuwait.

      "International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn't bring that up to me." -- George W. Bush, December 11, 2003

      I guess it's only evil brown-skinned heathens who are supposed to show respect for international law.

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    24. Re:Imminent Threat by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and it's a good thing no-one was living here in North America when we came over from Europe. We were able to expand our borders all the way to the Pacific Ocean and beyond without killing anyone.

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    25. Re:Imminent Threat by Steve+B · · Score: 1
      do you have any special evidence that Bush doesn't have that the Saudi's conspired or planned or otherwise had anything to do with 9-11?

      Nice try at weaseling. The evidence that Bush did have of Saudi sponsorship of al-Qaeda counts, too.

      --
      /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
    26. Re:Imminent Threat by aquabat · · Score: 1
      I don't know what the UN's stance on depleted U is, but I don't think it should be classified as a WMD.

      Depleted U is used in anti tank shells because it is massive, not because it is radioactive. The high mass gives a high kinetic energy to the shell, which it delivers to the target via a small point of impact, when the tip of the shell hits the tank. All that energy being transferred into that small point generates a conical shock wave inside the tank, and this shock wave sets off the munitions in the cabin, killing the crew and messing up the machinery.

      It's actually not supposed to be significantly radioactive. That's what the "depleted" in the name refers to. I'm guessing that any residual radioactivity wouldn't be much more carcinogenic than a pack of smokes a week. More a "weapon of mass annoyance", due to the difficulty of sweeping it all up.

      --
      A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
    27. Re:Imminent Threat by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      What the Iraq war has shown is that every nation in the world needs nuclear weapons, or the US WILL invade them. North Korea considers disarming, sees what happened to Iraq, and changes its mind.

      But yes, the US knew they had no nukes. In fact, they must have known they had nothing at all. Ok, not "must." But with all the guns and planes and helicopters and tanks the US sent to Iraq, do you know what was missing? Hazmat suits, gas masks, biological containment gear, medical gear for treating chemical weapon victims. NO GEAR AT ALL TO TREAT VICTIMS OF THE ALLEGED WMDS, OR TO PROTECT AGAINST THEM. Either they simply didn't care at ALL about the troops being slaughtered by chemical and bioligical weapons...or they know there were no such things at all.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    28. Re:Imminent Threat by nlindstrom · · Score: 1
      McVeigh was from New York- should we invade New York also?
      Ah, the classic straw man defense.
    29. Re:Imminent Threat by willtsmith · · Score: 1

      It's not a Straw Man. Timothy McVeigh was a real terrorist from New York.

      The argument is that we should go after terrorists where they are. Well, McVeigh was associated with some pretty shady characters who are still at large. If we find their locations, should we bomb them????

      Yes, I'm sure there were a few terrorists in Iraq (ironically, now there are a LOT there). But other countries have even more including Germany and the United States. Of course, the #1 hotbed of terrorist funding is SAUDI ARABIA!!!!!!

      Saddam Hussein was not involved in terrorist activities. He did launch a pre-emptive war against Kuwait 13 years ago. Yes, I agree that launching pre-emptive wars are BAD.

      But Saddam Hussein was not involved in Al-Queda. In fact, the two groups really hate each other. Saddam Hussein was NOT a team player.

      The argument stands. A few terrorists being located in a country is NOT justification for invading.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    30. Re:Imminent Threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude- you are an idiot. My cousin was in Iraq and he lived in his chemical weapons suit for the first 3 weeks in Iraq. Shut the fuck up because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, ass clown.

  80. The scariest fed gov video game ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Al Gore - Hunt for the camoflaged lock-box

  81. We can get him tried at the International Court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been following the International Court proceedings the past few years and found them to have all the charm and moral fiber of the old Stalinist ones.

    There were so many judicial f**k-ups like having a witness testify that they were coached and paid for their testimony yet still allow some testimony that it lost all sense of justice and common sense a long time ago.
    The best story is the of a character named Groban or Gruban in Bosnia. He ended up fueling the stories of one Pulitzer pud puller, was then investigated 'thoroughly', made the top 50 most wanted list and was indicted in court 'in abstentia' since there were scores of witnesses and testimonies who testified.
    Turns out it was a mythical folk hero like Paul Bunyan.
    So you see, the State Department is in fine company.

    There are so many more like that maybe the US government might want to send the Don over to Holland try to get him sentenced.

    zack

  82. Be smart. Have a thought. Stop parrotting. by Syncdata · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, those sound like objective, non-politically motivated quotes. I have it on good sources that:

    "mozumder cannot tell the difference between a qualitative analysis, and something that was taken out of a book designed to slam bush."

    "Muzumder is alltogether willing to abandon common sense, and accept that bush doesn't know anything at all about the rather broad topic of 'policy'"

    "Muzumder has an axe to grind, but uses a very soft stone. Consequently, he ends up looking like a jackass."

    Just because someone said something, even if it was in print, does not make it so. I never liked Clinton, in fact, I was one of the haters, but I never did anything so foolish as to suggest he was going to suspend national elections, like so many tinfoil hat conservatives did. Why? Because the idea is preposterous on the face of it. Is bush an eloquent speaker? Clearly he is not. Do you believe for one second that he does not have any knowledge of anything that could fall under the heading "policy"? If so, you are the fool, not bush. For an administration to contain a cabinet as diverse in opinion as his does, yet to not consider diverse viewpoints would be rather self-defeating, wouldn't it?

    Observation of the Polical scene requires thought, and examination. Quotes from the preface of a book whose entire purpose is to slam Bush do not qualify for the former, nor the latter. Dunce cap for you slappy.

    --
    "Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
    1. Re:Be smart. Have a thought. Stop parrotting. by Alric · · Score: 1

      I don't want to start a big thread about Bush, but your comment strikes me as humorous.

      "For an administration to contain a cabinet as diverse in opinion as his does, yet to not consider diverse viewpoints would be rather self-defeating, wouldn't it?"

      Just for fun, imagine that you are the President and want to take the country in a specific direction. However, you know your decision will be controversial. What would you do to give the appearance that many different opinions are all agreeing that your direction is the best?

      Would you surround yourself with people who are very similar to yourself? Or would you surround yourself with a diverse group of people who appear to represent many different voices of the country?

      I am certainly NOT stating that Bush has Colin Powell in his cabinet merely for good public relations. I am merely saying that your point about unused diversity being self-defeating is not well-reasoned from a political perspective.

      .

    2. Re:Be smart. Have a thought. Stop parrotting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fair enough.
      What you said though was thoughtful, and hasn't been said 1000 times. Thus I am inclined to take your point seriously. It's just tiresome reading the same sophmoric post 1000 times about how dumb Bush is. It takes about as much cleverness as it takes to make a Duke Nukem forever joke.

    3. Re:Be smart. Have a thought. Stop parrotting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their diversity is only (literally) skin deep. They are all wealthy technocrats (and no I don't mean rich sysadmins). I used to have respect for Powell as a dissenting voice, until two things:

      1) I realized how bozonkers his son was after reading about some of the absolutely terrible decisions he's made at the FCC (purely dogma based, without even an acknowledgement of the realities of the marketplace he's fiddling with). Although Colin is not his son, his son's actions reflect poorly on the father and the phrase, "the apple does not fall far from the tree" must be considered.

      2) When Powell testified to the UN that a substantial portion of neo-con assertations about WMD were true. It was such a blatant lie at the time that I could not watch more than half of it, had to turn it off. For weeks I wondered, exactly what did Rumsfeld and co have over Powell to make him do that? Did they promise that the state dept would be given an instrumental role in post Iraq? Was it an appeal to Powell's "good side" -- promises that he could make a difference to those beleagured people? I never found out, and I suspect Powell got the short end of the stick on that deal, whatever it was as he's since had to publically eat his words.

      None of the other cabinet members have an ounce of credibility - sure I admire Rice for her ability to rise to such a position of power from relatively humble roots. But that doesn't mean she was any less corrupted by the journey than the others up there with her. With an oil tanker named in her honor, it's clear she's as connected to big money as all the others.

  83. Sudam Hussien building WOMD in heaven by jonnystiph · · Score: 1

    So is the US going to bomb Sega too?

    --

    If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank

  84. Please check the gas main in your house by Hentai · · Score: 1

    I'm afraid you might have a leak.

    --
    -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
  85. Secret Code in Zero Wing by Fryth · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's really Japanese video game programmers whom the US military should be afraid of. "Somebody set up us the bomb" read backwards is "Bomb the US, upset somebody!" Looks like they are using a false pretense of a bad translation to hide secret code messages to their allies.

  86. ENOUGH WITH THE MARIO JOKES, okay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, god, a bullet in the eye of every "comedian" who comes out of the woodwork thinking they're being funny by pounding out some random Mario reference. Yours has to be the 10th I've seen just reading from the top.

  87. It's not just you by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    History shows that war on any common noun does not go well. Where are we with the war on drugs? How's that war on poverty going?

    For a war to really get traction and be effect it needs to be against a Person or Place, not just a Thing.

    1. Re:It's not just you by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      actually the war on poverty worked out fairly well. Poverty rates used to be much higher than they are today.

      Or so PBS lead me to believe - I may be a victem of media bias.

    2. Re:It's not just you by Majikk · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean like the war on Osama Binladen?

  88. They did by bonch · · Score: 1

    Do Some Freaking Reasearch.

    They did. That's why it was tossed out. This is how the process works. They check out tips. There's a process for this.

    Lemme ask you a question--did you "do some freaking research" to see if this story was actually true?

    1. Re:They did by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great! Now you've only got four more posts to go to make your daily quota!

  89. James A. O. Joyce, it's time to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please delete your Slashdot account immediately, and refrain from posting for the next sixteen(16) months. At the end of your sixteen(16) month probationary period, you will be required to write a five(5) paragraph essay, double-spaced, with margins, titled "Why I censor myself to preserve the quality of the WWW."

    Please refrain from using the internet for more than ninety(90) minutes per each seven(7) days.

    James A. O. Joyce, it's time to go.

    Sleep. Sleep. Shut the fuck up. And sleep.

  90. Shiftless, it's time to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please delete your Slashdot account immediately, and refrain from posting for the next sixteen(16) months.

    Please limit your use of the internet to ninety(90) minutes for every seven(7) days.

    Shiftless, it's time to go.

  91. who smelt it, dealt it by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    In light of the revelations of this videogame "threat" fiasco, the Iraqi torture photos, and countless other Bush-damaging stories of demented incompetence we endure daily, those of us free from denial and the tyranny of fear welcome leaks.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  92. One day in april... by Lewis+Daggart · · Score: 1

    Just out of curiosity, could it have been April 1st?

  93. Death to SEGA! Death to HeaDhuntEr ! by gomel · · Score: 1

    THIS IS INSANE ! THEY ARE MIXING REALITY WITH FICTION! I CAN NOT SAY WHAT IS A GAME, WHAT IS REALITY ANYMORE! THEY ARE DESOTRYING TEH REALITY!

    I have a question for the authors:

    Don't you think you should have to suffer for all the harm you've done...and intend to do to the human race?

    Don't you think the world's greatest game artist ought to be punished... for the most effective deforming of reality?

    Death to the demon, Yevgeny Nourish!"

    Death to Pilgrlmage! Death to tranCendenZ!"

    --
    Fight Frist Psoting!
    Browse Slashdot with 'Newest First'!
  94. gdi and nod by tepples · · Score: 1
    Your search "Brotherhood of Nod" returned multiple results: Your search for "GDI" returned several results:
  95. We Want You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is a Don Emilio Fulci when you need him?

    Maybe we could get Bill Gates instead.

  96. oh the irony... by bkirkby · · Score: 1

    all the gullible people actually believing the our intelligence services are that gullible.

  97. Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    They did. That's why it was tossed out. This is how the process works. They check out tips. There's a process for this.
    The fact that it made its way to the head of the FBI shows that the process broke down--something like this should never have gotten that far if the people under the director had been doing their jobs. That's what the parent poster was commenting on--which you apparently failed to understand. But then again, your post is yet another cheap attempt to get some karma from clueless moderators.
    Lemme ask you a question--did you "do some freaking research" to see if this story was actually true?
    I would ask you the same question, but the answer is obviously "no."
  98. Re:Hmmm. sept 11 and sega's game 10six by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sega's internally engineered multiplayer game, 10six, was reknowned as a hotbed for international hackers.

    sega abandoned it's hardware to focus on games,
    as everyone knows. what most people don't know
    is that the marketing department in north america
    single handedly brought the ruin of sega's hardware efforst, and their last,
    greatest release, the dreamcast.

    sega N.A. marketing pumped millions of dollars
    into flash in the pan concert and tour style
    promotions that did nothing to capitalize
    on the edge they held in sophistication,
    hardware, and available games. the dreamcast
    was swept away, and with it, sega's hardware
    legacy.

    anyhow.

    10six was part of sega's new direction in
    releasing games developed internally.

    the multiplayer game 10six was hacked so furiously, it was impossible to play. the producers recieved anon phone calls at home late at night with feature requests. etc.

    the world of 10six was out of control due to hacking, so the game was to be reset.

    the reset mechanism was a comet that was
    to strike the 10six simulated world,
    at 9 am, september 11, 2001.

    just before the comet was scheduled to 'strike'
    to reset the game,
    the first plane hit the wtc tower.

    i sh$t you not. ... i can't find the link to it,
    but apparently a spin off show about the
    x-files nerds had an episode about a remote
    controlled hijacked airliner crashing
    into wtc.

    odigo.

    etc.

  99. 9112001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Re:relax, it's just an abhorrence (Score:2)
    by taernim (557097) on Monday May 10, @04:36PM (#9112001)
    (http://www.neville-longbottom.com/)


    Never forget.
    September 11 memorial

  100. That's Nothing.... by stygar · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...I hear Ashcroft was this close to putting out a worldwide APB on a bald guy in a grey suit who puts his pinky to his mouth when he talks.

    He was a little embarassed at first, but Lockheed Martin now has a $10 Million contract to study the feasability of sharks with frickin' laser beams.

  101. Why Not? by rodgster · · Score: 1

    a journalist got the name and identity of an undercover CIA operative and released it.

    --
    Who will guard the guards?
  102. Re:parent is a troll, and flamebait by macdaddy · · Score: 1

    Ask and ye shall receive, troll.

  103. let them in to look by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well, you know, iraq did that.

    and we said, no, *show us* where you do not have WMD.

    and honestly, if i were the iraqi on the other end of that, i'd say... "?!?!?!" how? burden of negative proof? WTF? how about you prove i *was* going to do something, that i *do* have WMD, now that you have access?

    the bush administration gave iraq a catch-22: if we find WMD, we will kick your ass. if we do not find WMD, it is because you are hiding them, and we will kick your ass.

    can somebody please explain to me how the WMD argument, from the administration standpoint, makes sense?

  104. Pure propoganda by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    This isn't the first time the White House has released completely fabricated lies in an effort to confuse people. Remember the stories about the Clinton staffers "trashing" the White House, it never happened.

    This story is intended to convince us that the FBI and CIA is stupid. They've done a lot of these smear jobs recently to make our intelligence services look "stupid". That's the whole angle. The White House was never warned about anything. It was an "intelligence failure".

    So here we have another example of an "intelligence failure". The White House staffer sweeps in to the rescue with a Google search. The added benefit is to show that the FBI is hyper-sensitive and issues threat level increases based on video game characters (imaginary).

    If anyone truly thinks we have field agents dumb enough to issue a warning on non-vetted information, well they're pretty naive. I dare say they would be completely unable to survive the extensive training program that every FBI agent has to pass. If the FBI is that stupid, our country is truly in danger.

    If you combine "1984" and "The Prince" you will get the operating manual for the Bush White House. They're all LIARS!!!!!!!

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  105. First the pretzel... by stephanruby · · Score: 1

    ..., now this.

  106. Balls ... AND BRAINS???? by willtsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am glad that the man in charge of protecting our national security DOES have the balls to act when necessary.

    Yeah, hindsight is 20/20. But memos titled "Bin Ladin determined to strike in the US" tend to elicit some activity. It could generate a question like, "Hey Ashcroft, is this the reason you only fly private charter now????"

    Ascroft's response of course would be ... "No, It's because I de-prioritized counter-terrorism efforts. Bin Ladin has nothing to do with it. In fact I'm in the process of dismantling existing intelligence gathering efforts. For example, I cancelled the investigation on the USS Cole and forced that nosy FBI agent to come home. We booted his ass and he works at the World Trade Center now."

    The President's Response: "I thought I told you to shut down all those investigations against my old Bin Ladin buddies. You know them and my daddy go way back. They're really ticked that some of our agents are trying to shut down their charities. Make sure that money keeps flowing. It's how they fund their little brother Osama."

    Condaleeza Rice: "Mr President, would you like me to read the report to you again????"

    President: "No. 11 pages is way too long. Make sure you redact it so if I have to remember it again, it will only be two pages. Just cut out the nine in the middle. Yeah, and get Dick on the phone. I have to figure out how the Iraq war plan is going. Did we end up giving most the oil to Exxon or Shell????"

    Of course, the morning of 9/11 your beloved hero was very vigilant in protecting our nation. He knew about the diverted planes BEFORE he left the hotel. He knew about the first strike BEFORE he went into the classroom. A reporter asked him if he knew what was going on in New York, he responded "Yeah, I saw that on TV, that was a pretty bad pilot".

    Tick, tock, tick, tock, buzzzz. You can see the engine creaking inside the presidents mind. But he doesn't put two and two together. In fact, along the line he must have issued an order for the Air Force to STAND DOWN. Otherwise, all the jets would have been INTERCEPTED as per standard operating procedure (Google Payne Stewart Plane Crash).

    Big ball, no brain Bush goes into a classroom and sits on his ass reading to 2nd graders while our nation it under attack. Than, he is informed that a SECOND plane hits the World Trade Center. Big dummy still hasn't figured it out .... WE'RE UNDER ATTACK!!!!! Either that, or big balled dummy knew and was VERY PLEASED.

    Nevertheless, big balled dummey sits in a classroom for another 15 minutes and finishes the goat story. It's so rare that the President is among his intellectual peers. I'm sure he relishes those precious moments.

    OK big balled dummy, what do we do. Do you rescind your stand down order that prevented planes from scrambling. Nope, not yet. Plane #3 hasn't struck yet. Don't believe the lies. Do you seriously believe that planes capable of travelling 1500 miles an hour stationed just outside the capital would be unable to intercept the Pentagon airliner????????

    Are we stupid??? Is the military this utterly inept???? I don't believe so. If they were, the Soviets would have leveled our nation a LONG time ago.

    After all the stupidity on the morning of 9/11, the President makes a brave call to "authorize" shooting down the Pennsylvania plane. How brave he is since he could have prevented the fall of WTC 1, as well as saving the lives of people in the Pentagon. Had he not issued a stand down warning, he could have saved WTC 1 as well.

    Who knows, he might have even prevented WTC 7 from mysteriously imploding for no apparent reason.

    On to Afghanistan. Does Bush have the Balls to see the Afghan campaign through???? Does he have the balls to put large numbers of boots on the ground to catch his old family friend Osama Bin Ladin??????

    Nope. Bush is more concerned with Saddam Hussein. He was obsessed from day one.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Balls ... AND BRAINS???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Said.

      Here's a simplified version:

      He let it happen so he could do what he's doing today.

    2. Re:Balls ... AND BRAINS???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said.

  107. I don't think so... by sterno · · Score: 1

    Interesting little factoid: Saudi Arabia, which has always produced more oil than Iraq, produced roughly 40 billion dollars worth of oil in 2002. The price tag, this year, for occupying Iraq looks to be in the range of 100 billion.

    So they aren't really gaining anything from this as far as that goes.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:I don't think so... by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Heheh, you think that the people pulling the strings are using the logic of "what makes economic sense for the whole US, not just certain specific companies". That's so cute.

      Now, some flamebait:

      "How do you know an American is lying?"

      "His mouth is open!"

      Not so funny now that the shoe is on the other foot, eh?

  108. insightful? by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 0

    I thought it was funny. silly mods

    --
    TIAEAE!
  109. War on poverty. by autechre · · Score: 1

    Perhaps that's because hardly anyone wants to be poor, or at least not in the sense that a "war on poverty" would try to correct. Certainly, there are monks who give away all of their earthly posessions, but that's not quite the same as living in a dirty building in a bad section of town and eating Ramen most of the time. We're not going to try to force the monks into a luxury condo, but everyone else would probably prefer a nicer life.

    The war on drugs is a war on things that people want to do. I don't personally use anything other than alchohol and occasionally caffeine myself, but I don't see how pot smoking hurts anyone, ever (and if you think it does, is it worse than what alchohol does?) It will eventually fail; I believe it to be a question only of how long we can live in denial. At the very least, we need to be able to grow hemp in this country (US).

    Terrorism, also, is different. There's not a specific thing you can target, or at least not one that's feasible. We have enough food for the poor people in this country; there's probably enough for many other countries as well. It's easy to find the poor people; unlike the terrorists, they're probably not going to hide from you when you try to give them food and medical treatment (although to be fair, some are too proud to accept help).

    --
    WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
  110. Refuses to sell? *Someone* will sell by bee · · Score: 1

    5) "Iraq is sitting on some of the richest natural resources in the world to finance almost anything that they would like" Not if the rest of the world refuses to sell anything to them.

    You mean like the embargo that was going on for most of the 1990s? And the oil-for-food program that got Saddam kickbacks from France, Russia, and half the world? The same half of the world that whined the loudest when we announced we were going to take care of Saddam once and for all?

    Yeah. That was really effective.

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
  111. Re:"says no such thing" ?!? by Antaeus+Feldspar · · Score: 1

    Mod this up.

    Yes, despite the "illiterate dipshit" at the end. Uncalled for? Yes. So is
    claiming that the original material says "no such thing" when yes, it sure DOES.

    --
    If people are to respect the law, perhaps the law should begin by respecting the people.
  112. Intelligence by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

    You mean the US Government has intelligence?

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  113. *Bush* doesn't accept your premises any more by ianscot · · Score: 1
    Let's see, so you're telling me that:

    The only safe assumption a Commander in Chief could make based on that evidence is that he still has the weapons. Anthrax just does not dissappear, after all.

    (I particularly groaned at "safe assumption." Perhaps you'd like to talk to the family of the poor guy whose head was chopped off on television today. Safety is a relative thing, sure, but the word "safe" does not in any sense describe our foreign policy under Bush II. "Careful" also would be inappropriate. "Considered" would be an extreme reach. You need words like "daring" to comfort yourself with.)

    Let's take the pre-war (pre-revisionist history) version of this argument at its face for a moment, though, because you're willing to. You're saying there's a lot of anthrax left around. Hmm.

    So, now we've got a radically destabilized nation in which, unlike pre-invasion Iraq, all manner of Al Quaeda activities can mix with the amorphous ranks of "insurgents" without our being able to tell the difference any better than we can apparently tell Iraqi cops from the bad guys. Assuming that what you say is true, there are also stockpiles of WMDs around that we can't find. Presumably these would have been hidden somewhere. Perhaps by people with ties to the insurgency. You think?

    So how, exactly, did this invasion help prevent terrorists getting weapons of mass destruction? What's to keep these terrorists from getting hold of the WMDs you say are still there? Hellooooo? Is anyone home? I'm hearing an echo -- is that the cognitive dissonance?

    Or did the weapons run across the border into Iran or Syria? Is that how the invasion helped secure us against attack? Because I'm not finding it all that reassuring...

    If Bush and company believed their "He might give them to the terrorists" argument, they wouldn't have invaded the way they did to start with. Ansar Al-Islam scooted out of Iraq before the fighting even got to them -- they were in the Kurdish-controlled area, up north. Powell specifically talked about the danger of Ansar Al-Islam getting weapons from Saddam, but we didn't even fight the war like that was our reason for being there. We ran for the capital.

    And now that things are over, Bush and his supporters have largely slipped from their original rationale for the war -- though they'll refer to 9/11 as a sort of ghost of the idea, without being able to connect their phantom dots any more. I don't blame them; accepting the original arguments would only make them look more reckless.

    This war didn't do what it claimed to want to do. With this junta in charge, it's not going to do anything but sink us into the tar baby.

    --
    "Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
    1. Re:*Bush* doesn't accept your premises any more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I particularly groaned at "safe assumption." Perhaps you'd like to talk to the family of the poor guy whose head was chopped off on television today. Safety is a relative thing, sure, but the word "safe" does not in any sense describe our foreign policy under Bush II. "Careful" also would be inappropriate. "Considered" would be an extreme reach. You need words like "daring" to comfort yourself with.)

      So I guess you think we'd be safer if Saddam were still working on his nuclear program and developing more dirty bombs? You're right - safety IS relative, and I'll take the Saddam-less safety any day. Go live in Iran if you feel otherwise.

      Let's take the pre-war (pre-revisionist history) version of this argument at its face for a moment, though, because you're willing to. You're saying there's a lot of anthrax left around. Hmm.

      It's obvious to anyone not sucking on Kerry's tit that Saddam didn't prove he destroyed everything, retard.

      So, now we've got a radically destabilized nation in which, unlike pre-invasion Iraq, all manner of Al Quaeda activities can mix with the amorphous ranks of "insurgents" without our being able to tell the difference any better than we can apparently tell Iraqi cops from the bad guys. Assuming that what you say is true, there are also stockpiles of WMDs around that we can't find. Presumably these would have been hidden somewhere. Perhaps by people with ties to the insurgency. You think?

      You're right. Let's let Saddam back in and re-establish the form of "stability" I suppose you prefer.

      So how, exactly, did this invasion help prevent terrorists getting weapons of mass destruction? What's to keep these terrorists from getting hold of the WMDs you say are still there? Hellooooo? Is anyone home? I'm hearing an echo -- is that the cognitive dissonance?

      Maybe you haven't been following the news, but Saddam ain't in charge of Iraq anymore. That's already one huge step towards ensuring that there are no WMD there. Besides - even if there aren't any WMD's left - Saddam still violated the relevant UN resolutions which justified war. I don't know why I bothered typing that last sentence because it's obvious you can't comprehend it anyway.

      Or did the weapons run across the border into Iran or Syria? Is that how the invasion helped secure us against attack? Because I'm not finding it all that reassuring...

      You're right. Give Saddam his stuff back. Make the world a better place. Does that sound right to anyone else?

      If Bush and company believed their "He might give them to the terrorists" argument, they wouldn't have invaded the way they did to start with. Ansar Al-Islam scooted out of Iraq before the fighting even got to them -- they were in the Kurdish-controlled area, up north. Powell specifically talked about the danger of Ansar Al-Islam getting weapons from Saddam, but we didn't even fight the war like that was our reason for being there. We ran for the capital.

      Bull. Now you're just showing off the magnitude of your retardedness - there were several fronts to the war. Just because some troops are storming the capital doesn't mean others weren't up north. You obviously know nothing about military operations. Of course, you obviously wish Saddam were in power, so who cares what you think.

      And now that things are over, Bush and his supporters have largely slipped from their original rationale for the war -- though they'll refer to 9/11 as a sort of ghost of the idea, without being able to connect their phantom dots any more. I don't blame them; accepting the original arguments would only make them look more reckless.

      Whatever. There hasn't been any change in justification. If you knew how to read you'd know this.

      This war didn't do what it claimed to want to do. With this junta in charge, it's not going to do anything but sink us into the tar baby.

      It did do one thing - it separated the patriots from the idiots who need to just get their Saddam-loving butts the hell out of America. Sayonara, muchacho.

    2. Re:*Bush* doesn't accept your premises any more by workindev · · Score: 1

      Let's take the pre-war (pre-revisionist history) version of this argument at its face for a moment, though, because you're willing to. You're saying there's a lot of anthrax left around. Hmm. So, now we've got a radically destabilized nation in which, unlike pre-invasion Iraq, all manner of Al Quaeda activities can mix with the amorphous ranks of "insurgents" without our being able to tell the difference any better than we can apparently tell Iraqi cops from the bad guys. Assuming that what you say is true, there are also stockpiles of WMDs around that we can't find. Presumably these would have been hidden somewhere. Perhaps by people with ties to the insurgency. You think? So how, exactly, did this invasion help prevent terrorists getting weapons of mass destruction? What's to keep these terrorists from getting hold of the WMDs you say are still there? Hellooooo? Is anyone home? I'm hearing an echo -- is that the cognitive dissonance? Or did the weapons run across the border into Iran or Syria? Is that how the invasion helped secure us against attack? Because I'm not finding it all that reassuring...

      When faced with a rouge nation that repeatedly defies international law, you basically have two options. First, you can sit back and let diplomacy handle it. Involve the UN, implement sanctions, send in weapons inspectors, and hope for the best. Guess what? We tried that -- for 12 years. It didn't work. In fact, for 4 of those 12 years, Saddam completely refused to cooperate with anybody, and would not allow any inspections to take place. We (the UN) gave Saddam a list of things that he was required to do, and for 12 years and 17 UN resolutions, he refused to do them. We knew nothing more about his unaccounted WMD at the end of those 12 years than we did at the beginning.

      That brings us to the second option, which is to use the military to force him to comply. Certainly a last resort -- we waited 12 years before we actually did it. But 9/11 showed us that we could no longer sit back and hope that our enemies wouldn't try to kill us. We suddenly were forced to address every possible threat. Nobody has ever said that this would be easy, and nobody has said that Iraq was the last and final threat that needed to be addressed. It is entirely possible that those weapons are still in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and I'm sure we will use our intelligence and military to deal with those people if that is the case. But one thing is for certain, we don't have to worry about Saddam Hussein any more.

      If Bush and company believed their "He might give them to the terrorists" argument, they wouldn't have invaded the way they did to start with. Ansar Al-Islam scooted out of Iraq before the fighting even got to them -- they were in the Kurdish-controlled area, up north. Powell specifically talked about the danger of Ansar Al-Islam getting weapons from Saddam, but we didn't even fight the war like that was our reason for being there. We ran for the capital.

      I guess you were not paying attention. All of our initial plans involved a northern front coming in from Turkey, but if you will recall, Turkey changed their mind at the last second and wouldn't allow us to launch from their country. A run for the capital was the only option left.

      And now that things are over, Bush and his supporters have largely slipped from their original rationale for the war -- though they'll refer to 9/11 as a sort of ghost of the idea, without being able to connect their phantom dots any more. I don't blame them; accepting the original arguments would only make them look more reckless.

      I have not seen any such change in rationale. Bush told us in Jan. 2002 that Iraq posed a threat, and that we could no longer assume that the oceans would protect us against that threat. He said the exact same thing 2 weeks ago in his nationally televised press conference. Nothing has changed.

      This war didn't do what it claimed to want to do.

      This war (i.e. the "War on Terror") is far from over.

  114. It kept him in check by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    Yeah, Saddam Hussein was living high on the hog off his people. But he was effectively contained. He wasn't getting parts for munitions to reconstitute his pre-Gulf War military.

    We would have done better by arming the Kurds to the teeth and letting them take care of business.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  115. Do I have WMD???? by willtsmith · · Score: 1

    The world told him to show proof that he had disarmed. He didn't. The only safe assumption a Commander in Chief could make based on that evidence is that he still has the weapons. Anthrax just does not dissappear, after all.

    So, if I ask Cuba to show me proof that it has no military capability to attack the US, and they don't comply, my only option is to invade the country?


    Good point, how could anyone prove that they don't have WMD. Hell, I could have WMD hidden somewhere. How could I prove otherwise?????

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Do I have WMD???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are totally missing the point. We didn't just blindly ask him to prove he didn't have weapons. The UN compiled a list of weapons that Iraq had. This list has never been disputed- even by Iraq.

      After we had that list, we asked for the proof that the weapons on the list had been destroyed. The UN resolutions required him to show us this proof. He did show some of the proof, and he bullshitted about some of the other weapons ("We just dumped ALL of our VX on this concrete- honest!"), but he could not account for all of the weapons on the list.

  116. Worked pretty well by Aexia · · Score: 1

    We knew nothing more about his unaccounted WMD at the end of those 12 years than we did at the beginning.

    Actually, we know that any unaccounted WMDs have long since become useless and we've annihilated his capability for producing anymore.

    12 years and he hasn't even been able to look sideways at another country or much of his own country without incurring airstrikes.

    Sounds like successful containment to me!

    1. Re:Worked pretty well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we know that any unaccounted WMDs have long since become useless

      Some of it obviously has, but you might notice that UNMOVIC was not asking about those weapons. Mustard gas, the highly refined VX that Iraq was capable of making, and Anthrax are examples of WMDs that are still viable today. Those are the weapons that UNMOVIC was trying to account for.

      Sounds like successful containment to me!


      Containment? First of all, the goal of the UN resolutions was disarmament, not containment. And how can you claim that he was contained? He had WMD's and ties with terrorist organizations. How is that contained?

  117. Mods on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -2 troll? RTFA! mr_luc gave proof refuting the parent.

  118. Better that he be gone than in check by bee · · Score: 1

    And in the meantime, we still would have had to keep troops in Saudi Arabia (much to their displeasure) and keep on with the no-fly patrols. And Saddam would still have been giving $25K to Palestinian suicide bomber families.

    Not to mention that a lot more Iraqis would have been killed by Saddam, and arming the Kurds might have just meant that he would have gassed them with poison gas again.

    Granted, Iraq isn't paradise now, but reading Iraqi blogs like http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/ make me realize that Iraq is a much better place now than it was under Saddam, and it's in the US's best interest to keep it improving.

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
    1. Re:Better that he be gone than in check by willtsmith · · Score: 1

      The capture of Saddam Hussein has not stopped suicide bombing in Israel.

      Regarding the condition of the country, it's become a global fire zone. Saddam killed lots of people, but we have killed tens of thousands since the beginning of the war.

      Saddam Hussein justified that he tortured prisoners because "they were criminals". Donald Rumsfeld justifies the abuse of Iraqi prisoners because "they are criminals".

      Don't be surprised if many Iraqis can't tell the difference between US occupation and Bath Party rule. The big difference is that the electricity was always on. The water was always running. There was plenty of gasoline. Neighborhoods weren't battlezone.

      It is hubris to believe that we can waltz into any location in the world and "improve" it. Ultimately, there is a cost in American $$$ and American lives. The question is whether the effort is cost justified????

      We could have bought a LOT of solar panels and wind turbines for $200 billion (the current price tag). We could have built a LOT of schools, employed a LOT of teachers and a LOT of cops. Hell, we could easily an air marshall on every single US plane.

      Iraq is not a battle against terrorism. It's a family feud combined with a financial transaction. Our serviceman are dying for Exxon, Shell, BP and the Bush Family, not the United States.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    2. Re:Better that he be gone than in check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Donald Rumsfeld justifies the abuse of Iraqi prisoners because "they are criminals".

      What the hell are you talking about? Nobody in the administration, from the field commanders to Donald Rumsfeld to George Bush has tried to justify the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. Did you convienently stop listening when Rumsfeld apologized for the abuse and vowed to punish the people involved? Do you not realize that the only reason we know about the abuses now is because the Pentegon issued a press release in January that said they were investigating the crimes?

      And you might want to read this opinion piece. It is written by an Iranian born journalist who is considered an expert on the middle east. I think he knows more about what is going in in Iraq than the hate-filled drones like you that are just looking for a political advantage.

      Iraq is not a battle against terrorism. It's a family feud combined with a financial transaction.

      Bull crap. The removal of Saddam has made the world safer, and we can cross another country off of the list of states that sponser terrorism.

  119. It's sad that you believe that by bee · · Score: 1

    Please read the Iraqi blog I linked to. It paints a very different picture of Iraq than you do, and I'm more inclined to believe the word of someone that lives there than I am yours.

    As for the 'tens of thousands' claim, I keep hearing that claim that the US has killed tens of thousands of civilians, but I haven't seen any proof of it yet. Perhaps you're forgetting that our enemies there, in violation of the Geneva Convention, dress as civilians, hide behind civilians, use mosques as ammo dumps and sniper points, and generally do their best to use the people of Iraq as civilian shields?

    The Iraqi people now can speak freely, there are a couple hundred newspapers being published in Baghdad alone, and they're buying satellite dishes and anything Western they can get their hands on (owning a satellite dish was a felony under Saddam). It's too bad your hatred of George W. Bush is blinding you to the fact that anything good could be happening in Iraq.

    Neighborhoods weren't battlezones under Saddam because anyone that dissented in any way was killed or tortured. Electricity production passed its peak under Saddam several months ago. And no one could afford water or gasoline unless they worked for the Ba'ath party.

    And the way you use the word 'global', I do not think it means what you think it means.

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.