Slashdot Mirror


FBI Seeks To Restrict University Student Freedoms

amigoro writes with a link to the Press Escape blog, which is discussing new guidelines suggest by the FBI for university administrations. The Federal Bureau, worried about the possibility of international espionage via our centers of learning, now sees the need to restrict the freedoms of university students for national security. "FBI is offering to brief faculty, students and staff on what it calls 'espionage indicators' aimed at identifying foreign agents. Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators."

593 comments

  1. Since when by Herkum01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Did universities in the United States become part of the FBI?

    1. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Did universities in the United States become part of the FBI?

      Tell you what, when they arrest the Attorney General, Vice President and President and charge them with the long list of crimes they have committed against the US people, against the US constitution and against humanity, then lets talk about this stuff eh?

      They have by any objective standards ordered torture and committed other war crimes.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    2. Re:Since when by Shads · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nice to see we're dipping back into cold war era collective fear mongering.

      My government sickens me.

      --
      Shadus
    3. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      12 September 2001.

    4. Re:Since when by KillerCow · · Score: 5, Funny

      IM In UR Skoolz

      Learnin UR Competitive Advantagez

    5. Re:Since when by DigiShaman · · Score: 0, Troll

      This is not about a second cold war. This is about combating global radical Islam.

      Whether you agree or not with the agency's necessity is a whole other topic.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:Since when by Azuma+Hazuki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is not new, people. What do you think was going on in universities during the Viet Nam War, when people actually had the backbone to stand up and protest like they meant it? This is just the next turn of the wheel; history flows like a river and events repeat themselves.

      --
      ~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
    7. Re:Since when by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And the difference is? Other that in the first cold war, the boogeyman existed and had an army, while this one is imaginary?

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    8. Re:Since when by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is not about a second cold war. This is about combating global radical Islam. And the difference is?

      I mean, really the difference between the attempt to combat global communism and the attempt to combat global radical Islam is?

      It *is* a second cold war, just with the assertion of different enemies.
      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    9. Re:Since when by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like it or not, commercial espionage is a very serious issue; despite what movies and TV shows say, espionage by "friendly" countries goes on every day. They're not worried about military secrets; rather they want industrial ones that can help their own companies; so ensuring US universities are sensitive to indicators of espionage, just as commercial firms should be aware of the potential as well.

      Despite the headline, the FBI is not asking universities to restrict anyone's freedom, all it is saying is "We will be glad to brief your staff on what to be aware of to help identify *indicators* of espionage, and ask that you tell us so we can investigate as appropriate."

      The article states:

      "US university students will not be able to work late at the campus, travel abroad, show interest in their colleagues' work, have friends outside the United States, engage in independent research, or make extra money without the prior consent of the authorities"

      and provides a link to the guidelines that purport to do that. However, if the original author ever bothered to RTFG, they'd notice that the guidelines were simply that - a set of things to watch for that *may* indicate espionage; and don't ask anyone to restrict anyone's ability to "work late at the campus, travel abroad, show interest in their colleagues' work, have friends outside the United States, engage in independent research, or make extra money without the prior consent of the authorities"

      Anyone who has had a US security clearance has received a similar brief on an annual basis; the idea is simply co-workers, who are in close contact with each other, are the best first line defense against espionage and should be aware of the warning signs.\\Of course, the truth is often not as newsworthy as some sensational spin.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    10. Re:Since when by vampirbg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well not exactly... US soldiers cannot stand trial before either Hague or Rome Tribunal (newer version of the Hague), since they have immunity :) So, since they cannot be convicted, they cannot commit war crimes :)

    11. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like it or not, commercial espionage is a very serious issue; despite what movies and TV shows say, espionage by "friendly" countries goes on every day.
      We give technology to China, who some would say is our biggest global competitor these days, every single day. Every product I buy now has a "Made in China" sticker slapped on it. It *used* to at least say "Made in Republic of China" or "Made in Japan", but even the Japanese are outsourcing their products to mainland China.
    12. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Well not exactly... US soldiers cannot stand trial before either Hague or Rome Tribunal (newer version of the Hague), since they have immunity :) So, since they cannot be convicted, they cannot commit war crimes :)

      That is not the case at all. The International Criminal Court is simply a permanent court to replace the ad-hoc courts convened to prosecute previous war crimes. The US or more particularly the Bush administration opposes the ICC. That can be reversed by a future administration.

      The ICC only has jurisdiction if the national courts are unable or refuse to prosecute. US law has multiple provisions to prosecute war crimes in federal courts. The only situation in which an international court would be required would be if Bush were to pardon himself or his accomplices.

      The constitution only allows the President to pardon offenses against the United States. Gitmo is in Cuba and according to the Bush administration not under the jurisdiction of the US courts. If the US is not sovereign Cuba must be. I am sure that the authorities there would deal with the situation appropriately.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    13. Re:Since when by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 2

      Just as communists were fundamentally different from anarchists, terrorists are fundamentally different from communists.
      The fundamental difference is that in each case, the latter has been so overused as a bogeyman as to lose its effectiveness.

      It makes me wonder what monster will be trotted out next to justify military expenses. My best guess:

      The War on Publishers. Dovetails nicely with the current trend to trade freedom of speech for intellectual property rights.

      Although, if I knew anything worth listening to, I'd be rich. Feel free to laugh this off. Doing so costs nothing, after all.

      Just be ready to defend your children when the publishers begin peddling their filthy traitorous smut in your backyard. You wouldn't believe what they wrote about our honorable Commander-in-Chief.

    14. Re:Since when by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Informative

      BTW, having read the actual FBI document, it was not nearly as bad as the blog or summary made it seem. Those arguments seem to apply to people with security clearances exclusively, and the interest in other information is defined later on in the document as other *classified* information.

      The next question is: What sort of classified information and research is done at universities? How much of it? What are the counter-intelligence ramifications? What is the appropriate response?

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    15. Re:Since when by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why then? The FBI didn't do anything useful 10 September 2001. Maybe if the various intelligence agencies had actually made the world a better place they would possibly have reason for more power and wider control. But with the exception of the FBI helping solve occasssional domestic crimes, the work of the intelligence community has resulted in ever greater hatred and violence through out the world. Of course this reenforces our "need" for them, and we have a very obvious cycle. It was the very security agencies that are grabbing more power every day that made America so hated as to inspire international terrorism.

      --
      We are all just people.
    16. Re:Since when by TeraCo · · Score: 1, Informative

      Imaginary? Sept 11, and the London and Bali bombings were all real events done by real terrorists.

      --
      Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
    17. Re:Since when by vampirbg · · Score: 5, Informative
      I might be wrong, but here are the links:

      http://www.iccnow.org/?mod=usaicc
      http://web.amnesty.org/pages/icc-US_threats-eng

      Here's the quote from Amnesty International site:

      The USA is currently approaching governments around the world and asking them to enter into illegal impunity agreements. These agreements provide that a government will not surrender or transfer US nationals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes to the ICC, if requested by the Court. The agreements do not require the USA or the other state concerned to investigate and, if there is sufficient evidence, to prosecute such a person in US Courts. Indeed in many cases it would be impossible for US courts to do so, as US law does not include many of the crimes under the Rome Statute.

    18. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Did universities in the United States become part of the FBI?

      Apparently so. FTA: "... accesses without the need to know ...." This is the just the next step in the Maoization of Amerika. In China, it has become the job of the old biddy in the village to report anything troubling to the local central officials -- who's having an extra baby, who's not toeing the party propaganda line, etc.

      Over here, we call it "mandatory reporting", so we can tie it to the "For the love of God, will no one think of the children" horseshit. The plan is to make every citizen an unpaid deputy of the state security apparatus.

      To the best of my knowledge, it started with things like a note my wife found in her mailbox at the JC where she was teaching.

      It said "You are hereby notified that, as a condition of continued employment, you are required to sign the attached form acknowledging that, as a school district employee, you understand that you are henceforth required, under penalty of law, to report any suspected incident of physical, emotional or psychological abuse you encounter on campus, whether it occurred on district premises or elsewhere."

      Yet another unfunded mandate from the Office of the Commissar. Every time you turn around, you're being involuntarily made to act as a nanny for everyone in your environment.

      And, no, I'm unwilling to accept any implication that I think child abuse should be allowed to continue with impunity. If you think that, you probably just read the middle word in each of my sentences and are too fucking dumb to justify any attempt at an explanation.

    19. Re:Since when by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1

      Agreed. So-called friendly nations, and especially the unfriendly variety (i.e. China who still openly considers the USA to be an adversary) do everything they can to gather everything they can.

      It's no oddity or accident that there have been numerous cases where Chinese have been found to be shipping data, designs, and information back to the homeland. I personally have had Chinese nationals (educated and employed in cutting-edge US industries) say they were planning on returning home to exploit what they learned here -- at their employer's expense.

      It's just my personal opinion, but I think far too many foreign nations in this country who are exposed and privvy to too much of this Nation's technological information. Call it racist if you want to but I have had the Chinese I worked with openly call Americans stupid and lazy and say they consider us to be just fodder for their mill.

      For American companies to lay off American workers and just hand hard-won and expensive American technology to them so they can capitalize on cheap Chinese labor is handing them the keys to everything. They routinely run their production lines longer and sell the excess on the black market. Don't believe me? Read the electronics trade journals abut the disadvantages of having manufacturing outsourced to China. It is a known fact that they do this and yet companies continue to hand them technology and engineering advantage because they can make an extra buck in the short term.

      In the long run, however, we are selling our souls, our technology, and our futures to a country -- a Communist country -- that openly considers the USA an enemy and is actively looking for ways to bury us. I think they found it and our weakness - it's greed.

    20. Re:Since when by AuMatar · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      There's a few hundred nuts out there that are willing to kill themselves for a cause. Not a real surprise, nor is it different than any other time in history. The idea that they're organized, well financed, and wish to destroy the US is purely imaginary. The reason we haven't had an attack in the past 6 years isn't because we've stopped them all, its because the enemy doesn't exist. Do you really think that an organized, well financed enemy wouldn't be able to pull off any attack in 6 years? Not even bombing a school or some hit and run shootings? You think a group so incompetent they can't even do that would be able to pull off 9/11? No, there is no mystical Alqueda organization out there wanting to kill us all, thats a myth used by the government to keep us afraid and consolidate their power.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    21. Re:Since when by sgt_doom · · Score: 4, Interesting
      If Sept. 11 was done by "real terrorists" why hasn't anyone in the Bush Administration ever appeared concerned with apprehending them????

      Instead, he's killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Made hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions more, homeless in Iraq and surrounding Arab countries where they have fled to.

      He refused to convene any type of investigative commission, until finally, he was forced to - and even then he underfunded them and refused to allow them sub peona powers.

      And when he spoke before them with his handler Cheney, he refused to testify under oath. Wow, but I'm sure you know best, huh???

      I'll bet you're in the crowd that believes torture works? If so, then WTF is Osama???? Or at least, WTF is he hiding out at??? Guess all that torture doesn't work after all, especially not on innocents.....

      [Commonly heard phrase in the USA: "I'm a Christian, let's nuke Iran!"]

    22. Re:Since when by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      None of which were done by anyone with any ties to Iraq.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    23. Re:Since when by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of how good old Soviet Union did business back in the days....

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    24. Re:Since when by bdjacobson · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There's a few hundred nuts out there that are willing to kill themselves for a cause. Not a real surprise, nor is it different than any other time in history. The idea that they're organized, well financed, and wish to destroy the US is purely imaginary. The reason we haven't had an attack in the past 6 years isn't because we've stopped them all, its because the enemy doesn't exist. Do you really think that an organized, well financed enemy wouldn't be able to pull off any attack in 6 years? Not even bombing a school or some hit and run shootings? You think a group so incompetent they can't even do that would be able to pull off 9/11? No, there is no mystical Alqueda organization out there wanting to kill us all, thats a myth used by the government to keep us afraid and consolidate their power. Imagining that there is no AlQueda sounds far more nutty than the idea that there are religious fanatics that want to cleanse the world of the infidels.
    25. Re:Since when by Kohath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not to mention that there are bombings by the hundreds in Thailand and Bangladesh. And others in the Philippines, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Spain, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Russia, Argentina, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, etc. Oh, and Iraq and Afghanistan. Similarly, there are failed bombing plots in Canada, Germany, Britain, New Jersey, Chicago, New York, and numerous other places.

      To some people, these incidents are all imaginary, I guess. Or they're George Bush's fault, so they'll all magically go away on Jan 20, 2009.

    26. Re:Since when by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1


      In the long run, however, we are selling our souls, our technology, and our futures to a country -- a Communist country -- that openly considers the USA an enemy and is actively looking for ways to bury us. I think they found it and our weakness - it's greed.


      Don'y worry, that's their's as well; and will cause them great political and social problems, perhaps even civil war. They're rapidly building a two tier society of have and have nots; eventually there simply won't be enough to go around to keep the military happy and the majority of the population that is not benefiting from industrialization compliant. Look at Sanghai and it's illegal immigration problem - they can't keep people out and need the cheap labor - because the Shangaianese won't do the jobs they thing are below them (sound familiar).

      They may think they can get away with become a technological power without the corrupting influence of wealth but they are wrong As they become wealthier there cost advantage will disappear and shift to other developing nations, more people will demand prosperity, the younger generation will refuse to sacrifice for the common good, and leaders will arise who will oppose the central government; perhaps some of the very ones you talk about who are here today and eventually return.

      Capitalism is the ultimate stealth virus.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    27. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have by any objective standards ordered torture and committed other war crimes.

      Your objectivity clearly has an anti-Bush agenda...
    28. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3 words: come to Canada

    29. Re:Since when by wellingj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, there is no mystical Alqueda organization out there wanting to kill us all, thats a myth used by the government to keep us afraid and consolidate their power.
      You keep telling your self that just like Bush did before the attack...
      Reality is that there are a minority (very very small minority) of Muslims that want to destroy the US.
      The majority just want to be left alone to live as they will.
    30. Re:Since when by ananamouse · · Score: 0

      It is worth the drive to TAMU sometime to see the 1943 tiger flick "We've never been licked!" It give us a reference as to how out of control this country can get. I was not alive then so I do not know if it was a bunch of Democrats running things or if it was some kind of apolitical mass hysteria, But what we have now is nothing like it was back then.

    31. Re:Since when by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, that's a lot of hate.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    32. Re:Since when by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 4, Funny

      Objectivity clearly has an anti-Bush agenda...

      Fixed.

    33. Re:Since when by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Because I hate al qaeda, but I hate the denier even more. This "ideology", the kind that preaches about keeping ones head in the sand is the most dangerous kind for all human race. As such, those that subscribe to it are my mortal enemies. Why? because they put my own life and the society I live in great vast danger!

      Hate doesn't even begin to describe how I feel about this!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    34. Re:Since when by TimedArt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Plenty of classified research is done at universities. "Classified" doesn't necessarily mean dealing with weapons or secret aircraft. The university I work for does a significant amount of classified research, much of it medical.

    35. Re:Since when by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      How does some random person on /., who might not even live in the US, put your life and the life of your society at risk?

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    36. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, there have been a lot of bombs going off around the world, but do you think that the people that did it are part of some highly organised terrorist group hell bent on destroying the US, or small groups of misguided individuals who copied someone else's idea knowing it would be blamed on Al-Quaeda?

    37. Re:Since when by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Ignorance = implicit disregard

      Denying = Explicit disregard

      Put it to you this way regarding auto safety. If I was ignorant about road conditions and speeding, I would be endangering not only my life, but others as well. However, if I was denying there were any connections to speeding and road conditions, I would be actively putting myself and others in danger.

      Understand?

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    38. Re:Since when by mydn · · Score: 5, Funny

      But saying 1+1=3 doesn't change THE FUCKING FACT IT = 2!!!

      That depends on when you perform rounding and what the values were prior to rounding. 1+1 does in fact eqaul 3, for sufficiently large values of 1.

    39. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Imaginary? Sept 11, and the London and Bali bombings were all real events done by real terrorists."

      Oh, fruck you! It's all the US Government! Wake the fuck up! We did in Russia under Reagan and ever since them we've been the only global superpower. Since real enemies eventually kick your ass or become defeated and not scary anymore, it's handier to conjure one out of willing, naive fall guys. Control the news and you can start a war on unicorns if you wanted to.

      How many terrorists have you met? Actual terrorists?

    40. Re:Since when by mr_musan · · Score: 1

      don't you know the term terrorist is not PC ? you should call them fighters with out a army why did you lump the Bali bombings into that they had nothing to do with the states but rather the west invading and bueatifly culture and trashing it. that was devefsive terrorism instead of aggressive.

    41. Re:Since when by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Al Qaeda

      US perception:
      Arab funded, well organized, competent, and intelligent organization who wishes to cleanse America from the earth. Just waiting to do more 911 gang banging.

      Reality:
      Previously US Government funded, random group of religious nuts who wish to wipe Israel from the face of the middle east. They got lucky once and haven't done much since.

      Worrying about them is like obsessing over how you'd spend you lotto winnings. It's worrying an event unlikely to effect you in any way.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    42. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah well, two wrongs don't make a right, the fear mongering of the current climate here in the US and elsewhere is no better, than hiding your head in the sand. Seriously, there has to be a point between ignoring a problem to allowing the very enemy to win by altering the very way we live, and buy basically destroying the whole reason for fighting for this country. And I'm sorry but saying that it is a necessary evil is just as dangerous, and just as MORONIC as ignoring it, if not more so. So get over yourself, fear is /NOT/ the answer, nor is changing our country so it is not worth fighting for anymore.

    43. Re:Since when by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting
      What sort of classified information and research is done at universities?

      A lot more than the vast majority realize. Much is done under DARPA grants. In one of my previous grant positions, we were doing DARPA work, to which my boss said that we should keep it to ourselves. It was 1982, so we were not subjected to heavy security scrutinies, but in today's time, no doubt many ppl are, in private if not outright.

      And for the record, there are a lot of spies here. In particular, Chinese. I have written about this issue in several other posts.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    44. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 0, Troll

      its because the enemy doesn't exist. Do you really think that an organized, well financed enemy wouldn't be able to pull off any attack in 6 years? Not even bombing a school or some hit and run shootings? You think a group so incompetent they can't even do that would be able to pull off 9/11? No, there is no mystical Alqueda organization out there wanting to kill us all, thats a myth used by the government to keep us afraid and consolidate their power.

      Dude! Do you live under a fucking rock or are you just plain stupid. Did you not see the videos from the leader of that imaginary group bragging about how he managed to pull off the attacks of 9-11. Did you not see him say that the original attack was to include the West Coast as well. When you go to NY, and you see that giant hole in the ground and all the memorials for the dead people, do you think to yourself, "Wow! That hot dog vendor must have laced my sour kraut with acid because I'm seeing a hallucination of a giant hole! This is almost as good as that bender back in 2001 where I kept seeing crashing planes!" Do you tell the families of those victims that they imagined it all and accuse them of being government conspirators?

      Here is a news flash for you. Al Qaeda exists. Radical Muslims what to kill you. Some want to kill you because you don't pray 5 times a day facing west. Some want to kill you because you don't pray 5 times a day facing east. Some want to kill you because your beard is not the right length. Some want to kill your wife/daughter/mother/sister because they saw some ankle skin and it gave them a hard-on or they left the house without a male escort or they went to a male doctor who saw them naked. Denying these FACTS won't make them go away.

      It is NOT a government plot so John Ashcroft can beat off while listening to your phone conversations with bill collectors. This shit is REAL. Don't take my word for it, go to Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Gaza or Syria and ask the guy with the RPG or AK-47 what they think about your love of bacon. Be sure to offer them a pork rind and tell them how there is no such thing as Mohamed or God (Allah). Since it's all imaginary, you'll be fine.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    45. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, relax. There's a very very small part of every nation that wants to destroy the US. That's no reason to go bombing no nations.

    46. Re:Since when by MSTCrow5429 · · Score: 1

      Since all but one accepted funding from the Federal Government.

      --
      Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
    47. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Did universities in the United States become part of the FBI?

      They aren't. The summary, and for that matter, that article is FUD. The FBI is not restricting a thing. They are just asking administrators and teacher to report anything suspicious, that is all. Nothing they haven't asked of everyone in America.

      Nothing to see here. These are not the tyrants you are looking for. Move along.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    48. Re:Since when by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      If Sept. 11 was done by "real terrorists" why hasn't anyone in the Bush Administration ever appeared concerned with apprehending them????

      This statement pre-supposes that the Bush Administration isn't a set of totally incompetent doofuses. You only need to look as far as not finding WMDs in Iraq,how the Iraq was has gone (i.e. complete disaster), Katrina, abu-grave, gitmo, domestic spying, Scooter Libby, political firing of US Attorneys... the list goes on, to realize that this administration is just terrible at everything.

      Why should not going after Bin Laden be any surprise? At the heart of every conspiracy theory is the belief that the people at the top are ultra powerful and completely in control of everything. In the real world you sometimes get boobs like George Bush and his gang of suck in charge.

      --
      AccountKiller
    49. Re:Since when by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      The majority just want to be left alone to live as they will.

      QFT.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    50. Re:Since when by purduephotog · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Dude, you are a nutcase.

      The guys that actually did Sept 11? They're dead. That happens when a plane slams into a building/ground/concrete structure.

      Oh, you mean the ones that planned the attack? The US is slowly picking them off. They don't stand on a podium and announce their evil plans (like Dr. Evil), they use a dozen cutouts with hand couriered messages and ignore cell phones/wired phones for fear of being killed. It's a pretty good fear, so far.

      And I will not defend anything else you say about the administration because it makes me sick. But please give credit where credit is due- the US is going after the people that orchestrated Sept 11th, and will, more likely than not, find them (dead or alive).

    51. Re:Since when by russotto · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The USA is currently approaching governments around the world and asking them to enter into illegal impunity agreements. These agreements provide that a government will not surrender or transfer US nationals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes to the ICC, if requested by the Court. The agreements do not require the USA or the other state concerned to investigate and, if there is sufficient evidence, to prosecute such a person in US Courts. Indeed in many cases it would be impossible for US courts to do so, as US law does not include many of the crimes under the Rome Statute.
      So the US government is attempting to prevent prosecution by an international court of US nationals for, while they were under US jurisdiction, committing actions which are not crimes in the US? Sounds like that for once, the US government is doing it's job.
    52. Re:Since when by lymond01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reality is that there are a minority (very very small minority) of Muslims that want to destroy the US.
      The majority just want to be left alone to live as they will.


      I think that vocal minority also wants to be left alone and live as they will. People dislike the U.S. for many reasons, but a big one is that our policies and corporations get in their faces. I have a tendency to believe that there are organized units of people with a leadership that feels it has no voice and therefore resorts to violence to make itself heard. Who does it hire to commit the acts of violence? Brain-washable young people and others they can sway by religion which is still a dominant force for coercion in some parts of the world (including the U.S.)

      People will fight over anything of course, and our attempts at globalization are just what they're picking on today. Perhaps if we just remained Fortress America, people would hate us because we weren't Muslim/Buddhist/Purple, or didn't allow others into our country, or because we were fat.

      But I'll pretty much guarantee you one thing: you're not going to help matters by waging war against these people. You're just going to give them a valid reason to hate you.

    53. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Of course, that pantie torture is NOTHING compared to the three square meals, prayer time and air conditioning (that part the Prez DID order, that fucker!). I mean, all these guys were doing was planning to blow up a grade school in their home country and then ambushing the American invaders when they showed up to help save the Muslim children. How dare we treat them so rough!

      The pictures from Abu Ghraib demonstrate how ridiculous your statement is.

      And don't try to pretend that they were an exception. Someone decided to apply the Resistance to Interogation training protocol as an interogation protocol. it is stupid tactically and stupid strategically.

      Lets take tactics first. Yes you can make people talk with torture. Everyone talks, even people who don't know anything. And those who do know what you want to know lie. A real life Jack Bauer would spend his entire time chasing dead end leads.

      Remember the run up to the 2004 election when there was a security scare every week which would quickly be exposed as fake? Thats the quality of information you get from torture.

      Now lets look at the strategic side. In particular lets look at the career of Zarqawi, who was a small time crook who didn't amount to anything until he was arrested by Jordanian police and tortured.

      Instead of turning the US into a police state looking for terrorists lets stop making more of them.

      The pictures of Abu Ghraib have entirely erased the images of 9/11 in the eyes of most of the world. They are the biggest recruiting sargeant for Al Qaeda, the Sunni insurgents in Iraq, the Shi'ia insurgents, and all the other groups in the region who mostly spend their time fighting each other but thanks to the incompetent in chief are fighting US forces instead.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    54. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who thinks that GWB is the least bit honorable is so far out of touch with reality that they are out of touch with reality.
      I trust that I can make you understand this to the extent that you understand this.

    55. Re:Since when by Vellmont · · Score: 3, Insightful


      when people actually had the backbone to stand up and protest like they meant it?

      I believe there was also this thing called the.. draft. Where people could be sent off to a war and potentially die. There were also a LOT more troops and a LOT more casualties, so I'd bet everyone knew at least one person who died, or had a friend/family member who knew someone who died. I'd bet everyone knew someone that was IN vietnam. As far as the Iraq war goes, I'm 3 degrees of seperation from someone who died, and I'd bet even THAT is rare.

      The point being, this war has a lot less personal connections to it than Vietnam did. It has nothing to do with "backbone". For the most part people are motivated by what affects them. No one is going to be drafted (especially people on a college campus), and a much smaller percentage of the populace is personally connected to it. So it really shouldn't be surprising that no one is rioting in the streets because of it. On the other hand we did have an election driven by ending this war, so it's not a total disconect.

      --
      AccountKiller
    56. Re:Since when by Doddman · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      this one's gonna be offtopic but consider the following:

      the crusades happen around the year 1300 (roughly). right when christianity was 1300 years old.

      islam is now roughly 1300 years old.

      think about it.

      --
      If creativity is the field, copyright is the fence.
    57. Re:Since when by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reality is that there are a minority (very very small minority) of Muslims that want to destroy the US.

      There was a "very very small minority", With the horrible things we have done & are doing to/in Iraq, the number grows everyday. It is probably closer to "a minority" now.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    58. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Instead of turning the US into a police state looking for terrorists lets stop making more of them.
      So, uh... what made all the 19 terrorists in 2001? What made those that blew up the Cole? What made those that blew up our embassies in Africa? What made those that blew up Marine Barracks in Lebanon? What made the Turks invade Europe? Did Jordan arrest and torture all those guys? Islamic fundamentalists made terrorists long before Zarqawi.

      The pictures of Abu Ghraib have entirely erased the images of 9/11 in the eyes of most of the world. They are the biggest recruiting sargeant for Al Qaeda, the Sunni insurgents in Iraq, the Shi'ia insurgents, and all the other groups in the region who mostly spend their time fighting each other but thanks to the incompetent in chief are fighting US forces instead.
      So you mean that all these people that are blowing shit up all over Iraq and Afghanistan are doing so because of the pictures from Abu Ghraib? Geeze, WTF were they doing when the pictures were released from the previous Iraqi government cutting off hands, cutting tongues out, and the usual beaten with whatever the guards brought in that day!

      No, I'm afraid that these guys were hating us long before Bush was in office. Abu Ghraib is just a way for people like you to blame Bush for it all. It makes you feel all warm and fuzzy to think that people who kill school teachers in front of the class are doing so for a logical reason and panties-on-head is the best you can come up with. They'll ignore Habib's daughters getting raped while his hands get hacked off, but the naked pyramid forces them to plant bombs under a school building while it is under construction.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    59. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know what you mean.
      Just the other day I got a "massage", and the "massage girl" was made in China.
      (She told me that she was "made" in about fifteen other countries as well, but I wasn't using the word "made" in that sense.)
      The strange thing was, an hour later I was horny again, so I know she was Chinese.

    60. Re:Since when by theuedimaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This isn't about terrorists sonny, this is about espionage as a whole. It's a very, very general action they're taking to counter ALL foreign forces. And that's what one of the parents mentioned... what foreign forces? We're going through all this trouble and fear for... what exactly?

      It's this atmosphere that our government is creating that is so infuriating... giving unlimited powers to the executive, putting missiles in front of Russia, pointing guns at Iran... shit man, are we protecting ourselves or are we trying to start a war here?

      There have always been threats in front of us, but the important thing is to not let it ruin our lives. As another parent said, when did universities become a division of the FBI? The FBI can do their jobs, and they don't have to turn our society into a surveillance tool to accomplish their jobs. The FBI is there to protect us from threats so we don't have to worry about them... injecting fear into America is the antithesis of this mission.

    61. Re:Since when by starkravingmad · · Score: 1

      I don't think the OP was denying that terrorist attacks have happened, but the fact that they're all attributed to Al Queda without any kind of proper evidence - that means no torture confessions, no secret prisons, no "terrorists" held for five years without a trial, and no secret evidence that's only shown to "world leaders". By your argument, a murder trial would go something like this "We found a dead body, therefore clearly the defendant is guilty".

      There are nutjobs who want to blow things up, but that does not mean that they're part of some international organisation that wants to kill us because of our freedoms (I'm willing to bet that most people in Iran, Iraq, Palestine, etc. couldn't care less about your freedom or values, they just want to get by like the rest of us without being invaded, blown up or walled in).

      I'm surprised that the usually skeptical mob at slashdot is so filling to be bottle fed by fear mongering crap-a-minute governments. It's not treacherous to ask for evidence and information before making your own judgement about who's guilty. We fought long and hard to have free and fair trials in a *public* court and there's a good reason why.

    62. Re:Since when by TeraCo · · Score: 1

      Well, it certainly worked. Balinese tourism is doing quite poorly these days. They've got all the culture they want (and no money).

      --
      Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
    63. Re:Since when by Bardez · · Score: 1

      "unexplained absences"

      It's called gypping, hookie, a hangover, apathy, lack of motivation or more interesting things to do.

      As an American, I say that the Unites States of America is turning into a Union of Dumb-fucks.

      --
      Perception is the thin dividing line between reality and fiction.
    64. Re:Since when by toddestan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your objectivity clearly has an anti-Bush agenda...

      It's related to reality's well known liberal bias.

    65. Re:Since when by PMBjornerud · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure, there are lots of terrorists attacks. There are a lot of traffic accidents, too, absolutely dwarfing any terrorist-related deaths whatsoever.

      Not to mention world hunger. 24.000 dead per day, was it?

      Terrorism sucks, of course it does. But what on earth makes it so much worse than all the other things that kill so many more people every year? It's time to pull our heads out of the sand, suck it up, and deal with terrorism in a more rational way. At the moment, it seesm we're in some weird from of global panic.

      Panic never helps.

      --
      I lost my sig.
    66. Re:Since when by toddestan · · Score: 1

      So, uh... what made all the 19 terrorists in 2001? What made those that blew up the Cole? What made those that blew up our embassies in Africa? What made those that blew up Marine Barracks in Lebanon?

      You mean Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban? The guys that the US trained and supplied with weapons back in the 80's?

    67. Re:Since when by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      You are endangering lives, just because they are not US lives does not make your hate acceptable. I am betting you would also deny OBL was motivated by "US bombs rainning down on Lebannon" and trainned in the art of "creative chaos" by the CIA.

      In other words: You cannot fight hate with hate and then claim to be better than your enemy.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    68. Re:Since when by vandan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't assume that since Emperor Dubya is president that he's in control of anything, including his own bladder. He's a figurehead. There most certainly are people in control of things, and they use Bush to deflect people's attacks from themselves. If you look at Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rice, and the rest of the neo-con gang, you'll find that they are incredibly capable people ... unfortunately they're also incredibly evil people.

      The reason no-one's tracked down Bin Laden is simple: the Bin Laden Group is Bush's biggest financial backer. The Bin Laden dynasty and the Bush dynasty go back a long way.

      The reason why no-one's made any serious in-roads into bringing the so-called terrorists under control is that terrorism is the best thing that happened to ultra-conservative politics in the past century. It's vitally important for the Republicans, and increasingly more important for the Democrats, to have a horrible outside threat to protect the masses from, and to justify the increasing militarisation of the world, both domestically and internationally. Look at the rights we've lost in the name of protecting ourselves from the boogey man ... this article is but one example.

    69. Re:Since when by florescent_beige · · Score: 1, Troll

      Global radical Islam? What part of TFA or the DiA doc referenced that? I'll tell you which part, the implied part, the part that plays to your fears and prejudices that live in the FOX News (sic) part of your brain, that's which part. Because it's not stated explicitly.

      Also, the FBI doesn't even aim this at classified positions. I quote: '"What we're most concerned about are those things that are not classified..." Warren Bamford, special agent in charge of the FBI's Boston office, told the Boston Herald.'

      So, according to the FBI, a grad student is not to be trusted if he comes in with a hangover, works until 3 am, shacks up with a girl from Canada, and is broke. Have any of those people ever SEEN a grad school? There is nothing BUT people like that.

      One can go on and on about this. Love the section of the DIA's pocket guide to playing spy entitled "Why We Hesitate to Take Action" which lists "Fear of Being Paranoid" as a character flaw to be overcome. Funny, I thought paranoia was a mental illness. Does that mean mental illness is now a preq for working at the FBI?

      --
      Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
    70. Re:Since when by mr_musan · · Score: 1

      its not doing so badly, as i am livening in Bali at the moment, all the locals complain about no tourists, but you know this island needs to find something else to do !

    71. Re:Since when by revengebomber · · Score: 1

      Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    72. Re:Since when by Kohath · · Score: 1

      But what on earth makes it so much worse than all the other things that kill so many more people every year?

      It's a deliberate attack by identifiable people. Those people are attacking in order to gain power over many more people.

      We have options in response:

      1. Fight them and attempt to deny them success in their attacks and their goal of gaining power.
      2. Don't fight them. Allow them to succeed or fail without our intervention. Wash our hands of their future and the future of their victims. Don't lead. Don't help. Don't prevent terrorist bombings. (The victims will understand. "Car accidents are bad too", we'll say.)

      ---

      The difference is that car accidents are accidents. Terrorist bombings are an attack.

      ---

      Still don't get the difference? Let's compare these two statements:

      1. My next door neighbor got into a car accident with me. I was badly injured, but I'll be OK.
      2. My next door neighbor attacked and badly injured me, but I'll be OK.

      Which one is a bigger problem? Why?

    73. Re:Since when by homer_ca · · Score: 2, Informative

      Instead of turning the US into a police state looking for terrorists lets stop making more of them.
      So, uh... what made all the 19 terrorists in 2001? What made those that blew up the Cole? What made those that blew up our embassies in Africa? What made those that blew up Marine Barracks in Lebanon? What made the Turks invade Europe? Did Jordan arrest and torture all those guys? Islamic fundamentalists made terrorists long before Zarqawi. It's a numbers game. OBL and Al Qaeda have always had sympathizers through the 90's, but their popularity has only increased since the ill-fated invasion and occupation of Iraq. Increased popularity and increased recruitment make them a BIGGER threat. If the rate of recruitment exceeds the rate of catching or killing them, we lose. Understand now? Unless you're ready to enlist today, I'd say the U.S. military is just about tapped out in capacity to catch and kill more terrorists.

      Take a look at the Pew Research study on US popularity around the world. It's rebounded a bit since 2003 and the invasion of Iraq, but still pretty low.
      http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID= 252
    74. Re:Since when by cygonik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a great saying, and it's been said a lot, in different ways, but it boils down to this: If we restrict liberty to attain security, we will have neither. No, it's not imaginary. ..and no, it's not being handled well. I happen to think that freedom is not just a good thing, but that it is a necessary thing - just as responsibility and accountability are. It has also been demonstrated that our government, as it clamps down on terrorism, is sacrificing what I consider to be the lifeblood and identity of the nation - that freedom which many hold dear. The more that freedom is taken, the more likely it is that some people will get severely pissed off. The more pissed off people there are, the more likely it is that there will be pissed off people that are more open to persuasion by unsavory ideals. That would mean a higher likelihood that someone here will bomb things, which is, as far as I'm concerned, not a good condition to be in as a country. There are quite a few questions to be answered, that should be funded and looked into. What is more likely to cause a breakdown of social order in the united states - loss of freedom, or terrorist bombings? How likely is it that we will actually succeed at preventing terrorist bombings using methods that destroy or erode the freedom we ideologically base our national identity on? It seems insane that these people want to bomb us. But they are probably not insane. Why did they do it? What motivates these groups? What motivates the leaders of these groups? What methods of preventing bombings are successful, and which ones merely seem like they should work, or provide a false sense of security? For things we implement because of urgency - are those going as planned? Are they working? How can we increase our government's introspection without compromising our capacity to act? ..and most importantly, to me - since we are more and more required to endure the loss of freedoms anyway, are there also government-funded research programs looking into finding new ways to avoid getting bombed -- preferably ones which don't erode or destroy the freedom (and consequentially the security) of the nation? I think we should get sociologists, game theorists, political science majors, former military generals, etc. into a working team to attempt to address these kinds of issues. ..of course.. ..aside from the fact that it would be more difficult than getting a party of twelve to agree on a common pizza, it's probably not likely to get funded and implemented in the first place, even if the idea occurs to someone to make a bill for it or some such.

      --
      I am not an atomic playboy.
    75. Re:Since when by Moridineas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, uh... what made all the 19 terrorists in 2001? If you buy UBL's reasons, us having troops stationed in the Arabian peninsula during the first Iraq war. That's what got him going...not supposed to allow infidels, and CERTAINTLY not infidel troops.

      What made those that blew up the Cole? more of the same--also having a ship stationed off the peninsula.. same troops thing as above.

      What made those that blew up our embassies in Africa? Since al-qaida, same thing as above.

      What made those that blew up Marine Barracks in Lebanon? Us maintaining troops in a foreign country? I've never really understood this one as a terrorist action--can attacks on solely military targets really be "terrorist" ?

      What made the Turks invade Europe? I don't know, what made Europeans invade Africa, Mongols invade China, Germany invade Poland, etc etc etc... why does anyone invade anyone? turks were conquering places well before they were Muslim, so I don't think you can blame that one on Islam!

      Please note I'm not JUSTIFYING any of these... they're complete BS. but saying that there is no reason is also silly--the people doing the attacking have plenty of reasons. Iran doesn't randomly hate us, they hate us for helping to get rid of Mossadegh and supporting the repressive Shah all those years. UBL doesn't randomly hate us (though he comes close..) he has specific reasons. Again, I'm not saying any of these are GOOD reasons, I'm just saying, had we never interfered in the middle east, never supported cruel dictators, and never sent troops over there, things might be different.

      One could also make the argument it's good to fight Islamic fundamentalism, period. I might even say that! I do rather think it's one of those self perpetuating things though...the more you fight it, the more it pops up.

      I'll also agree that the original poster (the BLAME BUSH!!! guy) is a whacko...
    76. Re:Since when by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Islamic fundamentalists made terrorists..."

      ...and did so with the blessing and finance of the US and other western governments in an effort to rid Afghanistan of the "commies".

      "No, I'm afraid that these guys were hating us long before Bush was in office."

      Get back to us when you work out how and why Saddam came to power....

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    77. Re:Since when by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Remember the run up to the 2004 election when there was a security scare every week which would quickly be exposed as fake? Thats the quality of information you get from torture.

      No, that's the quality of information you get from the Bush Administration.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    78. Re:Since when by TeraCo · · Score: 1

      Have you considered Muslim fundamentalism?

      --
      Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
    79. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are a sick fool.

      Your hands are covered in the blood of both Americans and Iraqis. If there were any justice, you'd get drafted. Instead, you've got all the Rush Limbo you can eat.

      Disgusting Republican slave.


      Drafted? No, I volunteered. I served in the US Army and did two tours in the Mid East. I met the thankful Kuwaitis who fell all over themselves to thank me, no matter how many times I said "No thanks necessary" and "Your very welcome". I saw the kids and parents who were missing hands, feet, tongues, eyes and got to meet them. I am sad that I could not be there to stop the mass graves from filling up. I'm sorry I was not able to kill the men who shot women in the head and threw them into mass graves, still clutching their screaming children. No, I could do nothing for these people because people like you don't give a shit about anyone but yourselves. It does not bother you at all to know that millions of men, women and children were murdered in cold blood while you rely on corrupt politicians to compromise with thugs, rapists and murderers. It doesn't bother you at all that children starve or die from preventable diseases because YOU don't care enough about them to shut your mouth long enough for me to rescue these people and give them a chance at life.

      Yeah, if that makes me a sick fool, then I'll wear that badge with pride. However, don't you dare sit there and tell me I have the blood of Americans on my hands unless you want your blood to be the first! I may have Iraqi blood on my hands, but it was Iraqis that did all the stuff I described above. I'm willing to get blood on my hands for the lives and liberty of the innocent. What will you do beyond going to a "concert for peace" or put a "Bush-Bin-Lying" bumper sticker on your car? Sorry, but neither concerts nor bumper stickers have saved a life or freed a society. So until you are willing to get off your fat, peace-lovin ass and actually fight for something beyond "your right to party", I suggest you shut the fuck up as you have no idea as to what you are talking about.

      So, yeah, there is justice and I helped provide it.

      (Yeah, it's OT, but don't mod me 'off topic' unless you do the same for the parent)

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    80. Re:Since when by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I agree with a lot of what you say.

      However, you look at palestian and saudi children's television programming and you can see they do not need us to grow up terrorists.

      You have 6 year olds brainwashed into thinking it is good to die killing non-islamic people.

      Unless we stop them raising their children to be murderers, this is not going to end. The middle east tends to do things for 500 to 1000 years at a pop.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    81. Re:Since when by caranha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Reality is that there are a minority (very very small minority) of Muslims that want to destroy the US.
      The majority just want to be left alone to live as they will. Heh, the funny thing is: I bet there is a minority (very very small minority) of people in any country who would like to destroy the us while the majority want to be left alone.

      At least in the country where I live, and the one where I was born, this is true. And both are far away from the middle east.

      Probably the quoted statement is true even for the US itself :-/
    82. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FBI does counter intelligence investigations on every major campus in the country. This has probably been going on since the FBI's inception.

    83. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Informative
      Get back to us when you work out how and why Saddam came to power....

      Hmmmm. Let me look that up. Here it is:

      In 1979, Saddam achieved his ambition of becoming head of state. The new president started as he intended to go on - putting to death dozens of his rivals. Wait, that's from the BBC. We all know they are as conservative as Jerry Falwell! Let's try another source. Here we go:

      At the age of thirty-one (31) he had acquired what could have been deemed the number two spot in the Baathist party. He would continue in the position for approximately the next ten years. During that time, he would continue to consolidate his power by appointing numerous family members to positions of authority in the Iraqi government. In his position of Deputy in Charge of Internal Security, he built an enormous security apparatus and had spies and informers everywhere in the circles of power in Iraq.

      During this time, Hussein also began to accumulate the wealth and position that he so relished as a poor sheep-herder in the desert of al-Auja. He and his family, now firmly entrenched in the infrastructure of the country , began to control the country's oil and other industrial enterprises. With the help of his security network and several personal assassins, Hussein took control of many of the nation's leading businesses.

      In 1978, Saddam had been working with othe r Arab nations to ostracize Egypt for it's diplomatic initiative in resolving Israel/Arab questions. An ally, President Hafez al-Assad of Syria, almost became the undoing of Hussein's ascension. If a Syrian/Iraqi federation were formed against Egypt, Assad, not Hussein, would rise to a position of greater power in the relationship. President Bakr would lead the federation with Assad as second in command. Hussein could not allow that to happen and began to urge the President to step down. Again with the help of his family and security apparatus, Hussein was able to accomplish his task.

      On July 16, 1979, President Bakr resigned, officially due to health problems, but in reality a victim of Hussein's political in-fighting. Moving quickly to consolidate his power, he called a major Baathist meeting on July 22, 1979. During the meeting, various family members and other Hussein devotees urged that the party be "cleansed". Hussein then read a list of names and asked that they step outside. Once there, they are taken into custody.

      A high-ranking member of the Revolutionary Command, the head of the labor unions, the leading Shiite member of the Command, and twenty (20) others are then systematically and personally killed by Hussein and his top party officials. During the next few days, reports indicate that as many as 450 other military officers, deputy prime ministers, and "non-party faithful" were rounded up and killed. This purge insured Hussein's consolidation of power in Iraq. Am I missing anything?

      (OT, not if I'm responding to a post NOT marked OT)
      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    84. Re:Since when by mr_musan · · Score: 1

      on Bali ? no most people hear are Hindi so that wouldn't work well and the government of indoesia is quite against fundamentalism, but rather pro religion.

      though with all the shit the stats is creating these days perhaps that would be a good career move, as there will probably be good work in it for decades to come

    85. Re:Since when by tsm_sf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. --George Orwell

      OT I know, but I'm wondering where that Orwell quote comes from. I'm reading a collection of his essays right now and find him pretty fascinating.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    86. Re:Since when by Vellmont · · Score: 3, Interesting


      you'll find that they are incredibly capable people ...

      They're capable, but yet they can't get the facts right about Iraq? They're capable, but yet they've seriously screwed up the Iraq war in multiple ways? They're capable, but yet Paul Wolfowitz gets caught in a conflict of interest giving his girlfriend a position of authority in the World Bank? Somehow these things don't come from capable people.

      Seems like the actual evidence points to them being ass-clowns that screw up left and right, but until now have been able to talk their way out of it, or make friends who can do it for them.

      You can talk conspiracy theories all day long, but until you actually have evidence instead of motivations, it's nonsense. You can make up anything you damn well please if all you have is motivations to guide you.

      --
      AccountKiller
    87. Re:Since when by popejeremy · · Score: 1

      In the U.S.A., our government is a direct reflection of the votes of the people in the country. So what you're really saying is that your whole country sickens you.

    88. Re:Since when by dangitman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the U.S.A., our government is a direct reflection of the votes of the people in the country

      Actually, it's not. You can onlhy vote for candidates and parties. You don't actually vote on the issues you want to vote on. If you don't agree with "the whole package" of a candidate, you don't really get a say. You might, say, vote Republican because you are a "fiscal conservative" - but your vote might be interpreted as a vote for the Religious Right, or an anti-gay agenda - even if you disagree with those aspects. Alternatively, you might vote Democrat because they're "not as bad as Republicans" - but that doesn't mean you voted for Democrats supporting a war in Iraq.

      It's not a very direct reflection at all. In fact, it's a very distorted reflection, because the most extreme wedge issues tend to drive voters and politicians - not the mainstream beliefs that most hold. US politics is more a reflection of the lobbying powers of the monied classes, and the efforts of splinter groups.

      So what you're really saying is that your whole country sickens you.

      Most people in America don't vote.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    89. Re:Since when by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Which Bush?

      Bush the elder used to be head of the CIA, involved in all sorts of questionable and illegal deals. (Look up his support of Manual Noriega's cocaine trade during his term as CIA director.) The hatred was there: it's been re-justified and enhanced by the miserable failure of Iraq, and possibilities of winding it down peacefully evaporated for another 30 or 50 years.

      People do terrorism for logical reasons: it's effective warfare against a vastly, vastly superior military foe. It's only effective when you have enough support from the common citizens so that you can hide among them. Iraq was a military problem, not a terrorist one, before we invaded. We're killing more people there than Saddam did: that takes *work*.

    90. Re:Since when by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      You have seen the movie "Wagging the Dog", haven't you?

    91. Re:Since when by rts008 · · Score: 1

      "It is worth the drive to TAMU sometime to see the 1943 tiger flick "We've never been licked!'"

      Okay, I'm lost here.

      What is TAMU, and what is a 'tiger flick'?

      Not being (or trying to be) a smartass, just my curiosity is aroused now.

      Okay-done the Google search, it has Robert Mitchum in it...about a Texas college student going to Japan after being accused of consorting with the Japanese while in college.

      Also found TAMU as Texas A&M University.....never mind the questions I had, but thanks for the heads up for the info!

      Just got home from work and I guess almost instant gratification was not fast enough when I went 'WTF?'
      But then common sense took hold again.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    92. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 5, Informative
      I'm wondering where that Orwell quote comes from. I'm reading a collection of his essays right now and find him pretty fascinating.
      Since you asked nicely :-)
      It is amazing how little has changed between 1942 and today. It is amazing that Orwell's words are just as relevant today as they were 65 years ago.
      Here is the whole quote:

      Pacifism. Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security. Mr Savage remarks that 'according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be "objectively pro-British".' But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious 'freedom' station which serves out pacifist propaganda indistinguishable from that of the P.P.U. They would stimulate pacifism in Russia as well if they could, but in that case they have tougher babies to deal with. In so far as it takes effect at all, pacifist propaganda can only be effective against those countries where a certain amount of freedom of speech is still permitted; in other words it is helpful to totalitarianism. It comes from a periodical called Partisan Review, August September 1942

      A link to the whole Orwell article:
      Pacifism and the War
      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    93. Re:Since when by popejeremy · · Score: 1

      The choice to not vote is still a choice, and we are accountable for our choices.

      And if enough people understood that the two party system is what is holding us back, people would work to change it. The people have formed the parties, and the people have the power to undo them. They simply choose not to.

      So once again, you can't blame it on those bastards in Washington D.C. Those bastards are there because we willed it.

    94. Re:Since when by Vellmont · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Oh, you mean the ones that planned the attack? The US is slowly picking them off.

      See, the problem here is that "slowly" part. Why the hell did we go into Iraq when we should have been concentrating everything at taking down Al-Queda? I'll grant you that the OP is a nutcase that thinks the administration is a bunch of boobs on purpose (guess he's never run into a real gang of incompetents that back each other up).

      The US has lost so much internationally because of this idiotic Iraq war. After 9/11 we had the whole world behind us and it was hard to say no to helping us find Bin Laden. That kind of thing takes international co-operation, not empty threats of "dead or alive" (you can't threaten someone when you don't even know where they are). Now less than 6 years later we've squandered all of that on a failed war and Bin Laden still runs free. Now we've got everyone chasing at their own shadows with the "find the terrorist" business.

      --
      AccountKiller
    95. Re:Since when by misanthrope101 · · Score: 4, Informative
      No, many of us are aware that terrorism has skyrocketed since Bush took office. Many around the world believe that his policies are fueling the increase. Many government studies have noted that our actions are making terrorism worse.

      I know you meant that linking Bush to increased terrorism is just liberal Bush-hating, but to do so you'd have to be pretty ignorant of all the studies and articles pointing out that our actions in Iraq, the secret torture prisons around the world, the renditions, the detention without trial, etc are galvanizing the islamacist community and are basically a terrorist recruiter's wet dream. We're doing a better job than they are of making the USA look evil

    96. Re:Since when by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that giving their attacks against us credence above any other criminal activity does not lend them any legitimacy. On the contrary, giving terrorism a special status above a normal criminal legitimizes their activities in ways that simply trying them and jailing them does not. Fighting a war against them instead of policing them suggests that they are a legitimate governmental organization. Policing merely implies that they are criminals, murdering people. Do you see the difference? Instead of fighting them, we should be policing them.

      --
      SRSLY.
    97. Re:Since when by Rakishi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. Fight them and attempt to deny them success in their attacks and their goal of gaining power. You mean fail to fight them, increase their recruitment numbers, spread anti-American feeling, provide free propaganda for terrorist groups, attack a country that had little to do with terrorism, help spread fundamentalist islam into another nation and in general help them out? This isn't even counting all the fun training and money we gave them in the past. Since of course all those groups we're paying in the middle east to fight for us will never ever turn on us in 20 years, after all Saddam has remained a faithful ally of the... oh wait a second.

      You fight terrorism by not talking about it, not publicizing it and not giving it credibility. It's in the end a propaganda war where you you're never supposed to directly rebut the opponents points as then you not only give credibility to his points but also are then forced to play on their field where you likely can't win.

      The US isn't fighting back, it's cowering in fear and playing the game that the terrorists want it to play.
    98. Re:Since when by dangitman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The choice to not vote is still a choice, and we are accountable for our choices.

      So tell me, what exactly are the people who didn't vote accountable for? Not liking any of the candidates?

      And if enough people understood that the two party system is what is holding us back, people would work to change it.

      I think plenty of people understand it. But how do you change it? The two party system excludes anybody from other parties. So, how do you vote for an alternative, when nobody from one of the two parties will support that alternative? the only way would be to get a third party elected - which the two-party system prevents.

      So once again, you can't blame it on those bastards in Washington D.C. Those bastards are there because we willed it.

      Bullshit. Why are they blameless? I can certainly blame them for being bastards. There's plenty of blame to go around. It's true, it's not just them. But why can't I blame them for their actions?

      Also, it's not true that people really willed this into existence. I don't think many people actually wished for a fucked up government and a two-party system. That already existed before most of us came along. The point is that you can't blame everybody, because not everybody wished for that, and some people opposed it. How am I to blame if my neighbor votes for a corrupt politician? I can't force my neighbor to vote the way I'd like him to.

      Is someone born into a totalitarian dictatorship to blame for the dictator being in power?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    99. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is subject to international law regardless of the local jurisdiction's position on the matter.

    100. Re:Since when by learningtree · · Score: 1

      ok.. this may not be the right topic or the forum to post this... but i just want to clarify one thing as i have observed it is generally overlooked.. the fact is that 99% of the men you see in the US/Canada with long beards are not Muslim !! In fact they are Sikh.. and have nothing to do with Islam.. http://en.wikipedia.org/Sikh Alas, the people most affected by this Islamophobia are Sikhs and not muslims... I just posted it here as I thought Sikhs are generally mistaken as muslims in the West... In case you are wondering.. yes.. I am a Sikh...

    101. Re:Since when by Twanfox · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. :) Thank you for making my evening. :)

    102. Re:Since when by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Really? Please show me the evidence that they exist. Hard, physical evidence. So far we have a government claim, a single attack, and a video by some people who claim they were responsible, but haven't been able to do anything since. So whats more nutty- that a group of people that sound amazingly like someone ripped off the plot of GI Joe really exist, or that a small group of terrorists who gut amazingly lucky claimed to be more than they are, and the government ran with it?

      But please, by all means prove me wrong- show me evidence.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    103. Re:Since when by butlerdi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Having been in University during the war in Vietnam, I can say that in many respects you are correct. However, in the entire term of the war the casualties by US soldiers only numbered around 60,000 over a period of 20 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War. With a population of 200 to 250 million there was quite a bit of separation. From my experience people were upset for many reasons, one being the draft, the other being the fact that it was blatantly wrong and unjust. Oddly enough was also seen as fighting for American Oil interests by many in our University.

      --
      "If the King's English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!" -- "Ma" Ferguson, Governor of Texas (circa
    104. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck off

      ignorance is not an admirable trait

    105. Re:Since when by wellingj · · Score: 1

      If you only knew the bullshit that went on when you live here...

      I think some people are misinterpreting my position on the war. For the record:
      If the US was going to treat Iraq the way it treated Japan after WWII I'd be all for
      an actual war. OF COURSE it would be harder to deal with than Japan because...well
      Japan is an island. It doesn't border any other country. BUT this mess that the US
      has gotten into is to much like Vietnam, where the government is hamstringing the
      military to the point that it's futile. Best bet now it to pack up, say sorry we came,
      we thought we could help but it's obvious now that you don't want it, so let us know
      when/if you do want help. Otherwise here is some humanitarian aide.

      Problem with that issue is it will likely explode in civil war. Black Hawk down and all
      that kind of silliness if we even think about leaving any kind of force in Kuwait.

      So... No mater how the US got here it has to deal with the situation in some way. Pointing
      fingers and screaming "WHY?" doesn't really get us to get a "HOW" in terms of fixing this.
      Let the historians figure out the great misconceptions of the "WHY", because something
      needs to be done and done in a hurry.

      So you can flame me or do what ever but as it stands I've had 6 people I know in Iraq and 1
      Afghanistan... And from what I've heard something needs to be done different one way or the other.

    106. Re:Since when by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "Am I missing anything?"

      Yes

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    107. Re:Since when by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Radical Muslims what to kill you. Some want to kill you because you don't pray 5 times a day...<snip>

      Radical Christians want to kill you. Some want to kill you because you break the Sabbath (what do you mean, you don't sit inside and read the Bible until it's time to walk to church?). Some want to kill you because you allow your wife to go around with her head uncovered. Some want to kill you because you allow your wife and daughters outside at all.

      Batshit insane religious fundamentalism isn't just limited to Islam, you know.

    108. Re:Since when by BubFranklin · · Score: 1

      You keep telling your self that just like Bush did before the attack... Reality is that there are a minority (very very small minority) of Muslims that want to destroy the US. The majority just want to be left alone to live as they will.

      Ha, ha, ha.

      OOOOH!!! the boogie man is REAL!!!

      Every single state in our country has people that want to destroy our government. I know bleeding liberals that want to kill me because I eat meat and use paper bags at the grocery store. (no exaggeration) There are terroristic groups in every single society on the planet...

      To pick one of these entities out and scare the crap out of the entire nation to get us to hand over our freedoms for exactly zilch in return is what you are peddling along side of the "who ever controls stuff" group.

      -bub

    109. Re:Since when by bdjacobson · · Score: 1

      Really? Please show me the evidence that they exist. Hard, physical evidence. So far we have a government claim, a single attack, and a video by some people who claim they were responsible, but haven't been able to do anything since. So whats more nutty- that a group of people that sound amazingly like someone ripped off the plot of GI Joe really exist, or that a small group of terrorists who gut amazingly lucky claimed to be more than they are, and the government ran with it?

      But please, by all means prove me wrong- show me evidence. How about you go read the Indian newspapers, Matar. They've been warning America that these guys were only in it because we were giving them money during the Cold War (and afterwords some) to fight the Russians for us for quite some time. That this "cleanse the world of the infidels" could just as much mean us. Then they became angry that we stopped sending them money so they did turn that religious fanaticism against the other infidels (us). Their newspapers have been SHOWING not just telling us for years, full of pictures left and right, of what's been going on.

      There's no conspiracy or falsity about the existence of this war. Should we have gotten involved in it? Of course not, you can't simply overthrow a system in a country that has been running for hundreds of years, institute democracy, and expect everything to be ok. If you were Shiite, and the Sunnis had been killing your family for generations, would you care about democracy? No, you'd want to go kill the Sunnis. What happened was we decided to go after one party for our own political reasons, so of course the other party was all for us at the time. Soon as we take down Saddam? They want us OUT faster than you can say "revenge". They wanted us out so a). there was no order, so that b). they could go on a rampage to pay for their fathers' fathers' fathers' deaths. Now neither side is happy, if we leave the country will erupt in chaos over this religious-historical war and the world will say "see?" and if we stay we're liable to keep both sides so pissed off that either one does something about it (terrorism). We're in a catch-22.
    110. Re:Since when by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't forget kids : a bombing is a TERROR act and we are at war against TERROR right ? Everytime a bomb explodes somewhere, this is these Al-Quaida rascals who organized everything ! Trust us, we know their modus operandi, that's how we arrested so many of them. Don't forget also to report any student curious about things outside his field and who enjoy to get out of USA, that's very suspicious.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    111. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mean, really the difference between the attempt to combat global communism and the attempt to combat global radical Islam is?

      It *is* a second cold war, just with the assertion of different enemies.


      Actually the difference is massive. The communists, as evil as we might have considered them, did care about their families, their future, life in general. The Islamists doesn't care about anything, not even their wife, children or their own life. They live only for the expected rewards post-mortem and that makes them much, much, much more dangerous.

      They call their faith a 'Religion of Peace' but in the very same sentence threathen everybody that doesn't follow their way with bloody death and destruction. Islam is an evil death cult that does sport some fractions and member groups that actually seem peaceful and non-evil, but the majority seems hell-bent on killing and destroying everybody and everything else.

      To me there is but one choice: Destroy them before they destroy us. The peaceful ones that wish to co-exist are welcome but the rest must be destroyed - and soon, before they destroy us and our way of life. This story shows that they're already well underway by making us turn into a police state.

    112. Re:Since when by backwardMechanic · · Score: 1

      I'm a working academic, and the only point I don't score is unexplained affluence. To be successful in academia you need contacts, collaborations with other (gasp, foreign) groups, and branching out is often a good thing. Showing interest in colleagues work is as likely to be a sign that you've connected some pieces that the rest of us haven't. Maybe it'll be the next-cure-for-cancer, maybe it'll be a daft idea that goes nowhere.

      The point is, the listed indicators of espionage are also indicators of a successful researcher doing there job. It's a bit like saying terrorists eat bread, lets investigate everybody who eats bread. It's probably true, it's just not very useful.

    113. Re:Since when by polar+red · · Score: 0, Troll

      It is amazing how little has changed between 1942 and today. that's because 'civilization' is an illusion. Take away people's TV's and they become war-mongering savages.
      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    114. Re:Since when by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      Of course this is nothing new, but we have seen this movie and we all knows the ending sucks badly.

      All this "reporting suitability issues and potential espionage indicators that may surface in a colleague's behavior." seems eerily familiar.

    115. Re:Since when by polar+red · · Score: 1

      And US media is objective ?

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    116. Re:Since when by bytesex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The first crusade was in 1099. Islam was 1099 years old in 1731. In 1731, the Ottoman empire was on decline. Think about it - such parallels are useless.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    117. Re:Since when by mpe · · Score: 1

      If Sept. 11 was done by "real terrorists" why hasn't anyone in the Bush Administration ever appeared concerned with apprehending them????

      The terrorists certainly are "real" what's unclear is their actual identity.

      Instead, he's killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Made hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions more, homeless in Iraq and surrounding Arab countries where they have fled to.

      With Iraq not even featuring in the conspiracy theory the US Government started promoting in the afternoon of that day.

      He refused to convene any type of investigative commission, until finally, he was forced to - and even then he underfunded them and refused to allow them sub peona powers.

      Indeed the whole event is notorious for a complete lack of proper investigation.

    118. Re:Since when by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Informative
      For those people who don't have a freaking clue why this is funny, I just looked it up. Apparently, it's an:

      Internet meme. Protocol is "i'm in ur _____, _____ing ur _____." Started in 2006 on the game Counterstrike, when a player, asked where he was in game, responded "im in ur base killin ur d00dz." The meme gained a life of its own when attached to images of cats doing things. Yeah, I don't get it either. Ha, ha, I guess.
    119. Re:Since when by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the point - the article was a sensational misstatement of what the FBI was doing and asking. Here is what the guidelines actually say, as opposed to what was stated in the article:

      The fact that an individual exhibits one or more of these indicators does not automatically mean that he or she is engaged in espionage. However, based upon the situation, such factors can be cause for concern and might merit further investigation to determine whether espionage is a possibility.

      We should report observations of one or more of the following indicators pertaining to a person with access to classified information:
      Unexplained affluence
      Failing to report overseas travel
      Showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope.
      Keeping unusual work hours.
      Taking classified material home.
      Unreported or concealed contacts with foreign nationals
      Unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials.
      Attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know.


      The key points are:

      1 - exhibiting those behaviors do not mean someone is a spy; and
      2 - they apply to people with access to classified information.

      To your argument - "I'm a working academic, and the only point I don't score is unexplained affluence. To be successful in academia you need contacts, collaborations with other (gasp, foreign) groups, and branching out is often a good thing. Showing interest in colleagues work is as likely to be a sign that you've connected some pieces that the rest of us haven't. Maybe it'll be the next-cure-for-cancer, maybe it'll be a daft idea that goes nowhere." - point 2 is important because people with clearances and access are continually informed they are required to report foreign travel, contacts with foreign nationals (though generally only those that appear to be unduly interested in their work; not every contact at say a professional seminar), not to violate classified material handling rules, etc.

      If you aren't involved in classified work then the indicators are not applicable to you; unless of course you've been taking classified material home and showing an unusual interest in someone's classified work. I doubt, despite your stating that you have done those things, that they are are normal activities of a successful working academic or that you really are taking classified material home and showing an unusual interest in someone's classified work.

      "The point is, the listed indicators of espionage are also indicators of a successful researcher doing there job."

      Actually, as I pointed out the indicators in the guidelines aren't activities of a successful researcher; although the inaccurate statements in the article may be - which is why context is important when apply the guidelines. It's the context that makes them useful; a researcher not involved in classified work exhibiting those behaviors mentioned in the article is of no interest and not doing anything unusual. One working on classified projects that is doing what you mention - "... contacts, collaborations with other (gasp, foreign) groups, and branching out is often a good thing. Showing interest in colleagues work..." isn't either as long as they follow reporting rules; which are designed to help identify and counteract potential recruitment efforts by foreign intelligence agencies.

      "It's a bit like saying terrorists eat bread, lets investigate everybody who eats bread. It's probably true, it's just not very useful"

      Didn't you notice the part that said:
      "...based upon the situation, such factors can be cause for concern and might merit further investigation to determine whether espionage is a possibility."

      It's a pattern of behaviors, that have been tied to espionage, in specific situations that are cause for concern. Even then, nowhere does it say "...lets investigate everybody [who exhibits those behaviors]..." as you claim.

      In short, you've present

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    120. Re:Since when by mpe · · Score: 1

      It has also been demonstrated that our government, as it clamps down on terrorism, is sacrificing what I consider to be the lifeblood and identity of the nation - that freedom which many hold dear. The more that freedom is taken, the more likely it is that some people will get severely pissed off. The more pissed off people there are, the more likely it is that there will be pissed off people that are more open to persuasion by unsavory ideals. That would mean a higher likelihood that someone here will bomb things, which is, as far as I'm concerned, not a good condition to be in as a country.

      There's also the problem that a positive feedback loop is likely to result.

      It seems insane that these people want to bomb us. But they are probably not insane. Why did they do it? What motivates these groups? What motivates the leaders of these groups?

      These questions are not PC. Another factor is that occupying other people's countries tends to result in people fighting back against the occupying country...

    121. Re:Since when by mpe · · Score: 1

      There's a few hundred nuts out there that are willing to kill themselves for a cause. Not a real surprise, nor is it different than any other time in history.

      These causes are many and varied.

      The idea that they're organized, well financed, and wish to destroy the US is purely imaginary.

      More to the point it's a Conspiracy Theory. It's interesting that the credibility of conspiracy theories often depends more on who is advocating them than how well they fit with facts.

      No, there is no mystical Alqueda organization out there wanting to kill us all, thats a myth used by the government to keep us afraid and consolidate their power.

      There probably is a real "Al Queda" though, just that it is probably not some global terrorist conspiracy lead by some man living in a cave.

    122. Re:Since when by Gearoid_Murphy · · Score: 1

      For the most part I agree with what you say. However, I personally feel that extremist islamic movements will find fault with western societies, no matter what we do. The absolute mayhem that erupted in the middle east when western media published cartoons of mohammed illustrates quite clearly how little we have to do in order to be the focus of their ire. Consider the backlash over the knighthood of Salman Rushdie, an indian writing a fictional book which contained references to disputed parts of islamic dogma; resulted in death threats against him condoned and organised by national governments, such as Iran and Pakistan. What i'm saying is that these people will react with extreme prejudice against any perceived slight against their identity. Thats whats wrong with the situation. If we, as the collective western societies got pissed off any time we felt the islamic nations violated our principles (human rights, treatment of women, right to free speech), the situation would have deteriorated a long time ago. I'm tempted to descend into a vitrolic diatribe against such nations, but I don't want to lose track of point; as along as extremist religious interests have influence in these countries, we're going to have a problem with them.

      --
      prepare the survey weasels.
    123. Re:Since when by ananamouse · · Score: 0

      >What is TAMU, and what is a 'tiger flick'? I was there for 4 years during Ford/Carter. It was both everything you would imagine and at the same time nothing like that at all. Tiger flicks were yea rah! propaganda that Hollywood made during the early 40's. There are some animated flicks where superheroes attack stereotypical examples of the races that the U.S. was battling against at the time. I hear a lot of otherwise well meaning people blather on and on about the patriot act and the evilness of (either) George Bush. When you bring up the crap Roosevelt (either) pulled they look at you like you asked them to solve a math problem.

    124. Re:Since when by mpe · · Score: 1

      Dude! Do you live under a fucking rock or are you just plain stupid. Did you not see the videos from the leader of that imaginary group bragging about how he managed to pull off the attacks of 9-11. Did you not see him say that the original attack was to include the West Coast as well.

      This would be the video tape "found" in Afghanistan, with poor quality audio of a man who may or may not be Osama Bin Laden. Indeed the majority of people who have examined it are of the conclusion that this is an actor who has some resemblence to Osama Bin Laden. Note that the FBI are not actually hunting Bin Laden in connection with 9/11, because they do not have what they consider sufficent evidence.

      When you go to NY, and you see that giant hole in the ground and all the memorials for the dead people, do you think to yourself, "Wow! That hot dog vendor must have laced my sour kraut with acid because I'm seeing a hallucination of a giant hole! This is almost as good as that bender back in 2001 where I kept seeing crashing planes!" Do you tell the families of those victims that they imagined it all and accuse them of being government conspirators?

      The holes in the ground and dead people are connected with what happened. They don't tell you much about who might be responsible or why they might have done it.

    125. Re:Since when by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Damn, that's complicated. I think we need to get Ashley Judd on the case.

      Or in other words, simply because you can't be convicted of a crime, does not mean the crime was not committed. I believe that is covered under the calling a dog's tail a leg clause.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    126. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are all requirements for having a security clearance and working on projects that require those clearances. That's all there is to it.

    127. Re:Since when by john83 · · Score: 1

      "Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators."

      Wow, baring the military & intelligence stuff (which I really doubt anyone would be able to actually spot), that describes a typical grad student lifestyle.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    128. Re:Since when by ggKimmieGal · · Score: 1

      Since when did learning become a crime? Better keep my head down in my literature courses that I take for fun. Apparently, stepping outside of the field of computer science is something worth investigating. And since when did college students keep normal work hours??? None of us work 9-5. Most of us work from like 6am to 8am or 10pm to 2am. And most of us don't have steady hours.

    129. Re:Since when by ultranova · · Score: 1

      One can go on and on about this. Love the section of the DIA's pocket guide to playing spy entitled "Why We Hesitate to Take Action" which lists "Fear of Being Paranoid" as a character flaw to be overcome. Funny, I thought paranoia was a mental illness. Does that mean mental illness is now a preq for working at the FBI?

      If your job is finding threats, paranoia is a virtue. It doesn't mean that you should arrest people for having Canadian girlfriends, but it certainly means you should investigate quietly such suspicious characters.

      Besides, if you happen to find any home videos showuing erotic uses for maple syrup, the Gnutella users are going to love you :).

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    130. Re:Since when by vampirbg · · Score: 1

      No... If you can't be convicted of war crime, than you can't be a war criminal :) You can't even be accused of war crime...

    131. Re:Since when by mpe · · Score: 1

      I don't think the OP was denying that terrorist attacks have happened, but the fact that they're all attributed to Al Queda without any kind of proper evidence

      Indeed with little evidence at all and at least as much actual evidence implicating other parties.

      - that means no torture confessions, no secret prisons, no "terrorists" held for five years without a trial, and no secret evidence that's only shown to "world leaders".

      You missed off "dodgy video recordings"...

      By your argument, a murder trial would go something like this "We found a dead body, therefore clearly the defendant is guilty".

      Possibly with "anyone who dosn't agree must be helping the defendent/murderer".

    132. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Informative
      You mean Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban? The guys that the US trained and supplied with weapons back in the 80's?

      That is not actually the case. Bin Laden was the Saudi money man for the Afghan resistance. The Saudis agreed to deliver matching funds to those supplied by the US.

      Bin Laden's real issue is that he would prefer to be in charge in Saudi Arabia than the House of Saud. He can't do that with the US army camped on Saudi Arabia.

      The real organizer of AQ is a guy called Zawahiri. He was the leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and was a ringleader in the assasination of Sadat.

      Taking out Bin Laden and Zawahiri would have a major impact in reducing terrorism. Torturing random Iraqis picked up by the US occupation will only increase terrorism.

      And as for the wingnut campaign to mod down the original post as 'offtopic' circulating on their mailing lists. What could be more ontopic here than the fact that the Bush administration is lawless and refuses to comply with the most basic provisions of international law? The use of torture means that every new power grab must be resisted.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    133. Re:Since when by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      It's a hard pill to swallow. We have to come to terms that civil rights are a suicide pact.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    134. Re:Since when by dharbee · · Score: 1

      "What I will do is everything I can short of kill to stop the killing you're wallowing in"

      I look forward to hearing about you standing in front of tanks in the middle east.

      OH WAIT! When you said EVERYTHING you meant "nothing, apart from insulting people".

    135. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did it occur to you that you were just fixing some of the damage that was largely initiated by your own government?

      It was the US/British goverments who overthrew an Iranian democracy in favour of a West friendly dictatorship.

      When that puppet dictatorship was overthrown by a theocracy, the US moved next door to Iraq and started building up another dictatorship to play off against the (Soviet backed) Iranian one.

      And finally, when Saddam Hussein was massed on the Kuwait border, it seems that the US made it clear that they had no interest in interfering if an invasion went ahead.

    136. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > So until you are willing to get off your fat, peace-lovin ass and actually fight for something beyond "your right to party",
      > I suggest you shut the fuck up as you have no idea as to what you are talking about.

      You're just a tool. And being a tool doesn't give you any special 'pass'.

      1. bush sr. sold the desert storm as an effort to stop the evil iraqis from causing humanitarian problems (like his example of iraqis unplugging kuwaiti child incubators). Almost all of these major issues that he quoted turned out to be fabricated.

      2. the iraqis didn't kill millions of kuwaits.

      3. we're only there because of the oil

      4. the us ambassador to iraq was asked ahead of time by Saddam if the us had any objection to his invasion of kuwait - and the ambassador said that we didn't. That was a mistake, but regardless have US 'permission' to invade.

      5. the borders between the two countries are completely artificial so it's understandable that there will be wars over them.

      6. bush sr. had no exit strategy from the first iraqi invasion - and left a disaster to his successors. This was known ahead of time - and many in congress opposed the plan to invade iraq for this reason. However, the country was so hopped up and excited about invading someone that almost all these reasonable politicians were thrown out of office in the next election.

      7. the invasion was the motivating force for the attack on 9/11

      8. the lack of an exit-strategy from desert storm combined with a clueless neo-con administration with imperialist fantasies is the reason that we're mired into a ten year war now.

      and lastly, and most importantly: if you really want to challenge people to do something about horrific situations in the world - go to Darfur to help stop genocide, or you could have gone to Rwanda where 800,000 people were hacked to death with machettes - but of course, the US isn't and was never pushing hard to move its military to those places: there's no oil. Alternatively, you could work to stop the administration from continuing it's completely stupid and unjustified attacks on countries like Iraq. That would help. A lot more than volunteering to be their tool.

    137. Re:Since when by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No doubt the same Orwell who wrote this:

      "War, it will be seen, accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them. But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society. What is concerned here is not the morale of masses, whose attitude is unimportant so long as they are kept steadily at work, but the morale of the Party itself. Even the humblest Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation, and orgiastic triumph. In other words it is necessary that he should have the mentality appropriate to a state of war. It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist. The splitting of the intelligence which the Party requires of its members, and which is more easily achieved in an atmosphere of war, is now almost universal, but the higher up the ranks one goes, the more marked it becomes. It is precisely in the Inner Party that war hysteria and hatred of the enemy are strongest. In his capacity as an administrator, it is often necessary for a member of the Inner Party to know that this or that item of war news is untruthful, and he may often be aware that the entire war is spurious and is either not happening or is being waged for purposes quite other than the declared ones: but such knowledge is easily neutralized by the technique of doublethink. Meanwhile no Inner Party member wavers for an instant in his mystical belief that the war is real, and that it is bound to end victoriously, with Oceania the undisputed master of the entire world."

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    138. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Throw gasoline on the fire, and the flames will rise higher. It makes one wonder if thowing gasoline on there is really the right thing to do to put it out, doesn't it?

      We'll never khow many of these would have been attempted, or how many fewer fanatics might have been motivated to act violently, had stupid strategic decisions such as the invasion of Iraq not occurred.

      Look, it is freaking obvious that you can't just ignore these nutbars. Hit them hard. That's what was done in Afganistan, and the world was all for it after 9/11. Investigate and arrest too. Nip those plots in the bud using good intelligence.

      On the other hand, attacking a target (Iraq) that had absolutely *nothing* to do with the 9/11 event has to be one of the biggest strategic blunders imaginable. If anything, it has created the conditions for terrorists to flourish there and around the world. Perhaps the only action more insane would have been to invade Saudi Arabia itself (because it was the source of most of the 9/11 highjackers). The invasion of Iraq has been a fanatics dream! They were on the run, and now they have a powerful recruiting message and a great testing ground for their tactics. Fantastic. The invasion has invigorated their agenda.

      You're quite right that the problem isn't going to go away when Bush is finally out. He's created a new "crusade", the effects of which are going to take many decades to go away, and which is going to spawn generations of fanatics to come. When he's out of office we'll be cleaning up after his mess for the rest of our lives, but at least there is a chance that the hole that the U.S. has been digging itself into for the last several years won't be getting any deeper.

      As Iraq has shown, the U.S. can win every battle in the "war on terrorism", but still lose in terms of actually diminishing terrorism. It's the wrong approach. It will take someone with a little more insight into the problem than Bush and his gang to make actual progress on the issue, and turning universities into spy agencies isn't going to accomplish that. Heck, most of the behaviours listed sound like a typical graduate student's existence.

    139. Re:Since when by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Standing in front of tanks in the Mideast is what's keeping us part of their civil war. I look forward to you getting a clue.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    140. Re:Since when by vertinox · · Score: 1

      They're capable, but yet they've seriously screwed up the Iraq war in multiple ways? They're capable, but yet Paul Wolfowitz gets caught in a conflict of interest giving his girlfriend a position of authority in the World Bank? Somehow these things don't come from capable people.

      Not to Godwin this, but in the same respect Hitler had the world's most capable cohorts at the time and probably the most strategically capable General Staff that the world will over see. That said... He still blundered horribly by invading Russia. Simply by the shear fact that he had such a capable staff of Generals is probably why he lasted so long after that.

      Capable people are still human and make fatal errors while guided by their own delusions of their own "great" plan.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    141. Re:Since when by vuffi_raa · · Score: 1

      the cartoon wouldn't be as funny I guess, if wiley e. coyote caught the roadrunner

    142. Re:Since when by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
      Have you no shame, Mr. Bush? At long last, have you no shame?

      (ref Army-McCarthy hearings)

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    143. Re:Since when by vuffi_raa · · Score: 1
      the thing that I find so ironic though is that

      1. Fight them and attempt to deny them success in their attacks and their goal of gaining power. who is this targeted at?
      insurgents in iraq?
      the are INSURGENTS not terrorists... another word for insurgents is rebels.
      we cannot call them that because, we support rebels, people that stand up to a gov't that they feel is wrong are supported by the US, unless they are INSURGENTS.
      look, I don't support the insurgents, but we are really in the middle of a civil war and trying to choose sides, it is ridiculous to do so. if you ask people who do they want to win sunni or shea here in the US most people don't know or care- neither one of them is al-qeda all they want to do is opress their population in the manner that they see fit- sunni one way shea the other. The fact of the matter is that I wouldn't be surprised if once we are gone from iraq whoever ends up in charge will commit atrocities on the other population.
    144. Re:Since when by spun · · Score: 1

      No it is people like you who are full of hate and an illusory sense of heroics that make the world less safe. Violence leads to more violence, not to peace. You believe your myth because you want to believe it, because it makes you feel special. You are a lone sane crusader in a vapid sea of ignorant cowards, at least in your own head, aren't you? It's pathetic. Sick, sad, egotistical, self serving, and morally bankrupt. You are the kind of small minded, hard hearted, violent man that has kept humanity from achieving its true potential for thousands of years. You and your kind are the root of what is wrong with the world. It's not the big, scary evils that you preach violence against that are the problem. It's the myriad of small, evil men like you.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    145. Re:Since when by spun · · Score: 1

      And if you said that speeding causes cancer, we'd all laugh at you. The only reason we aren't laughing now is that what you are actually saying is fucking frightening. It's bug-fuck crazy, and not funny at all.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    146. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait? Insightful, witty posts getting modded down as "Flamebait" and "offtopic" left and right. Jeez, who is the fuckwad with mod points?

    147. Re:Since when by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Instead, he's killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis?

      Now let's be fair, at most he's killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, and gave the rest the opportunity to kill each other (which many of them jumped on.)

    148. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm only AC because I don't want to take the time to log in.

      This war is evil. You have participated in an evil war.
      Please don't try to rationalize military imperialism abroad and wartime fascism at home with that tired old "fighting to defend freedom" line.
      If you want to fight to defend freedom, it needs to be done here in America.

    149. Re:Since when by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      And are american 6 year olds being trained to say they want to blow themselves up and kill non-islamics?

      I'm sorry dude- I'm not religious but I know most churches in america teach a message of peace and tolerance to their children.

      Even (and especially) those in very poor areas.

      Being evil is independent of being poor or rich.

      American media is extremely objective. You get everything from hard left washington post and new york times to hard right rush limbaugh and laura ingrams. You have fox news on the middle right to right and MSNBC and CNN (and CBS, ABC) on the middle left to hard left.

      American media is corporate controlled and so it will not give a lot of anti-corporate messages but it is not state controlled so it does ride government hard (except where it would cross a corporate agenda).

      Again-- we are not teaching our children that it is good to kill complete strangers because they believe differently than us. We are not teaching our children that it is okay to kill hispanics, indians, and chinese because they are underbidding us for jobs.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    150. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Radical Christians want to kill you. Some want to kill you because you break the Sabbath (what do you mean, you don't sit inside and read the Bible until it's time to walk to church?). Some want to kill you because you allow your wife to go around with her head uncovered. Some want to kill you because you allow your wife and daughters outside at all.

      Really? Where? I call bullshit. So far, this century, there have ZERO honor killings perpetrated by Christians. There have been ZERO terrorists attacks (yes, that include abortion doctor killings) perpetrated in the name of Christianity.

      In other words, you are either a complete idiot, totally ignorant, a very bad liar, or a combination of any of these. The Christians I know offer food and shelter to the poor, homeless and hungry, regardless of their religion. They invite any who wish to join them inside and only ask for 10%, although it is not a requirement. Granted, many Muslims will do the same, but they seem to have a hard time reigning in their radicals.

      Christian Radicalism ended with the Spanish Inquisition. It's over. Move on. Comparing radical sheiks who want to see you beheaded with your Sunday morning TV preacher asking for money is so completely ignorant that it's offensive to anyone with common sense.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    151. Re:Since when by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      I'm tempted to descend into a vitrolic diatribe against such nations, but I don't want to lose track of point; as along as extremist religious interests have influence in these countries, we're going to have a problem with them.

      Just remember that it's not a nation or country that's our problem, it's a relatively few individuals causing a big stir. The rest, as the original poster mentioned, just want to live their lives. They may or may not agree with one side or another, but they aren't willing to go that extra mile and send their sons and daughters off to die by bullet or explosive. You can be for a cause but against a particular means to achieve it.

      Peace, understanding, and stability in the Middle East? Hell yes. Blowing up ours and theirs to accomplish this? I don't think so.

    152. Re:Since when by polar+red · · Score: 1

      And are american 6 year olds being trained to say they want to blow themselves up and kill non-islamics? That can be. The reality in Palestine is a lot harder than in the usa. If people get killed just for being in the wrong place or being of the wrong religion, eventually they will loose their faith in humanity.

      Again-- we are not teaching our children that it is good to kill complete strangers too bad that message gets lost to people with a lot of power.
      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    153. Re:Since when by djasbestos · · Score: 1

      Deliberately lying does not constitute ineptitude, although by no means does this mean I think of them as "ept". Any conspiracy that does not factor in government incompetence (especially in this administration) cannot be true.

      Surely you agree that Gonzales saying "I do not recall" is 100% manure?

      In any event, as your quotee said, it has been advantageous for some in the Bush admin to spread erroneous information or to run with information that is patently false, because by the time it is discredited, its purpose has been effected.

      Besides, if they really were working in good faith, why would they constantly maintain a veil of secrecy around *everything*?

      They are capable, but sloppy. Undisciplined. Drunk with power. They are without restraint.

    154. Re:Since when by neomunk · · Score: 1

      Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the news recently. I feel like petting the trolls today, so here ya go...
      http://news.google.com/news?q=Taguba&btnG=Search+N ews
      Try out those stories and get back to me about those 3 squares a day. You hungry enough to not mind being forced to rape your son? Be raped by a man in uniform?

      I'm (usually) nicer than this, but make like Jeff Gannon and go suck GWB's cock. Whatever you do, just shut the fuck up with your 'anti-bush' conspiracy theory bullshit. The man is a crook, was a crook from the start, and now has PROVED (even to most hard-headed people) that he is a crook. It's pretty fucking simple.

      Oh, and just to let you know, politics isn't sports. You don't pick a 'team' and root for them no matter how bad they fuck up. Politics is the organizational principle that we've developed society around, so when you find people that are using their position to the detriment of society as a whole, you fucking remove them. Again, this is really simple. Turn off Fox News and pick up a book please, preferably a history book. We've seen all this rhetoric and ultra-nationalism and pseudo-patriotism (yeah, that means FAKE patriotism) before, and it hasn't worked out very well yet. It won't. Society built on bullshit falls into it's own bullshit like houses built on sand.

      Do yourself a favor and get informed.

    155. Re:Since when by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      There have been ZERO terrorists attacks (yes, that include abortion doctor killings) perpetrated in the name of Christianity.

      So what do you think the Irish Republican and Loyalist killings were? Religious war, admittedly thinly disguised as politics, and funded by your beloved US.

      Go to certain remote parts of the north of Scotland (the Isle of Lewis is a good case here) on a Sunday, and let your dog out into the garden. I guarantee you someone will shoot it, for no other reason than letting your dog run about in the garden is breaking the Sabbath. Christianity has its extremists just like any other religion.

    156. Re:Since when by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's also very interesting that he was making lists for the British government of people he considered pro- and anti-communists after the WW2.

    157. Re:Since when by Elrac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK ArcherB, you're not a sick fool. What you are in fact is a patriotic, loyal, good-hearted, well-intentioned fool.

      Thanks to your efforts and the efforts of thousands of others like you, death rates in Iraq have more than doubled; many thousands of Iraqis have fled the country, and life for those who remain has been horribly disrupted by the constant fear of violence. Yes, Saddam was an evil dictator who used of torture and violence. But if you look at the bottom line, most Iraqi citizens were better off before the US invasion than after.

      The thankful Kuwaitis you rescued are exactly the affluent, self-serving egotists you rant against. They bless you for having rescued their material comforts, and saving their corrupt government from the consequences of drilling laterally into Iraqi territory. Furthermore, when they're not being rescued, they hate Americans every bit as much as the Iraqis do.

      The fact that you risked your life does not automatically make you a better person than those who know better. You followed your evil, bumbling President into the greatest disaster in American history and are still blind enough to feel all righteous about it. If you ever come to see the truth, I hope it doesn't hurt you too badly.

      --
      When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Rel
    158. Re:Since when by wellingj · · Score: 1

      Whoa some one pour water on that flame...

      I never said there wasn't strife from within either. Maybe you should
      stop reading into what I say and just actually read.

      I like my rights just as much as the next guy, I am a libertarian after all...
      But to ignore any threat is just asking for trouble. And that's what our
      foreign policy has done in the past, It simply ignored the backlash of what we do.

      SO... If want to continue to discuss this, how about you actually read my statements
      and disagree with them. You might make more sense that way instead of making up things
      I have not said just so you can disagree...

    159. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So tell me, what exactly are the people who didn't vote accountable for? Not liking any of the candidates?

      Lazy, ignorant, apathetic, disillusioned, or any combination thereof. I know a lot of people who are both ignorant and apathetic--that is, they don't know why their vote counts, and they don't care. If something doesn't directly affect them, they have no interest in it. And I'm not talking about immigrants or their immediate descendants either.

      On the other hand, my 85-year old grandmother, who became a US citizen about ten years ago, has gone out to the polling station every year since she could just because she can, even if she only knows that republicans are "bad" and democrats are "good."

      Also, it's not true that people really willed this into existence. I don't think many people actually wished for a fucked up government and a two-party system.

      I don't think that's entirely accurate. I don't think people want their rights taken away. But at the same time, I don't think people want to do anything to keep the rights they have. Remember the whole idea of "certain inalienable rights" and whatnot. People have this tendency to think that if these are so-called "intrinsic" rights, then they can't be taken away, so people don't really have to bother defending them. When in reality, the difference between "shouldn't" and "can't" are oceans apart.

      So by not doing anything (like voting), people are, whether directly or indirectly, promoting bad government. Not to mention, people like polarizing things because it's easy and simple, and hence they passively encouraged the two-party system by thinking this way.

    160. Re:Since when by jejones · · Score: 1

      > we're only there because of the oil

      I'm perpetually amazed that that line is always trotted out.

      If that were the case, we could have saved billions of dollars by making a sweetheart deal with Saddam Hussein, the way the French did. Google "totalfinaelf" and "hussein" for details.

    161. Re:Since when by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      well, there is something imaginary about "failed bombing plots" isn't there?

    162. Re:Since when by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "The pictures of Abu Ghraib have entirely erased the images of 9/11 in the eyes of most of the world. "

      Oh c'mon. While I consider the AG acts to be very wrong, and glad the people doing that were punished...it is hardly what I'd call torture. I mean, putting panties on your head, and being blindfolded, stripped and making a human pile on a floor, while possibly embarrassing...isn't torture.

      Hell, some people out there would PAY good money to have that done to them....

      :-)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    163. Re:Since when by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

      I mean, all these guys were doing was planning to blow up a grade school in their home country and then ambushing the American invaders when they showed up to help save the Muslim children. How dare we treat them so rough!

      Were they CONVICTED of the crime of planning a terrorist attack? Is there any PROOF that they were engaged in such planning?

      Of course not. That's why your argument (which is basically the neocon argument) is just plain wrong.

      If the detainees were tried in a real court (not one of the secret military tribunal/star chambers) and convicted on the charges, then by all means, throw them in jail. But to hold them in limbo indefinitely goes against everything in our Constitution and "the American Way."

      And, of course, holding the detainees like this, or "trying" them in a secret tribunal, now gives license to ANY other government to indefinitely detain American troops or citizens and hold them indefinitely, without trial, while torturing them.

      Does that make crystal clear why the whole Gitmo thing is just WRONG on so many levels?

      -a
    164. Re:Since when by bwcbwc · · Score: 1

      Seems like the actual evidence points to them being ass-clowns that screw up left and right

      Actually, I think they're just promulgating that other tenet of neo-con ideology: That the government needs to be shrunk because the government can't do anything right and everything should be privatized and opened to market forces. If you lead government, but believe that the government is inherently incompetent, you don't have any motivation to make it perform to any standard.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    165. Re:Since when by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Funny, I don't see any evidence here.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    166. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > > we're only there because of the oil

      > I'm perpetually amazed that that line is always trotted out.

      > If that were the case, we could have saved billions of dollars by making a sweetheart deal with Saddam Hussein, the
      > way the French did. Google "totalfinaelf" and "hussein" for details.

      Sure - any sensible person would have to agree. But remember that you're talking about the Bush administration and their neo-con flock here. Why would they make a deal when they'd figure that it would be so much easier to just take the country over?

    167. Re:Since when by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      Rather OT, but worth noting for sure.

    168. Re:Since when by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      And US media is objective ?

      The word you're looking for is objectionable. Same root, but different connotation.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    169. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> What made those that blew up Marine Barracks in Lebanon?

      >Us maintaining troops in a foreign country? I've never really understood this one as a terrorist action--can attacks on solely military targets really be "terrorist"

      Yup; its called "collateral damage"; incidentally, we invented the term.

      Or perhaps you'ld care to offer an alternate explanation for the 650 thousand iraqi's dead, and 2.4 million displaced since the illegal US invasion of a sovereign nation?

    170. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For what it's worth, Doc Ruby, I agree with the essence of what you're saying. It's too bad most people aren't ready to hear the truth (so they give you the troll mod).

      For what it's worth, I also admire your courage. That ArcherB dude sounds pretty messed up. These days, based on some hard experience, when I point out the truth to someone like ArcherB I post anonymously because I don't want him or someone like him to try to hurt me in real life in the misguided belief that truth is decided by hurting people. The way I see it. It's the ideas that matter anyway - not where they come from.

      Anyway, take care of yourself. I tried posting the truth a while back and my faith in humanity is still shaken from the resulting outpouring of hatred.

    171. Re:Since when by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thanks for the support. It does matter, because it's not just fun standing up to someone ranting angrily at you who's killed people for a living, and is dehumanizing you the way they did the people they killed before.

      But I'm not scared of them. I'd rather die than live in fear. I don't let bullies control my life. And I've found that standing up to them typically reveals them to be cowards so scared that all they know how to do is fight. They're sad, and all too human.

      Shows of reasonable support from bystanders is a powerful reminder to these alienated bullies that people can get along without fighting. So I thank you twice, once for the bully who owes you, but could never admit it, for showing them how to act.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    172. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ArcherB: However, don't you dare sit there and tell me I have the blood of Americans on my hands unless you want your blood to be the first!

      ArcherB, I doubt you'll take my advice. You seem way to far gone for that. You are overwhelmed by emotions you don't even understand that, in your anguish, seem to you to be anger against people who opposed the war. But I'll give you some advice anyway. I like the idea that the truth looked you straight in the eye and told you how wrong you are - even if you are unable to recognize it and, as a result, eventually destroy yourself.

      First, let me help you understand the suicide bomber. The real reason someone chooses to be a suicide bomber is not because of some global injustice or even because of some extreme religious teaching. The real reason that someone becomes a suicide bomber is that there personal life is so messed up that they don't want to live anymore. The thing is, if that person actually realized that fundamentally they were unhappy because of personal problems then they could make changes in their life to solve their personal problems. If they were lonely they could make friends. If they were poor they could develop the skills to get a high paying job. If they were damaged by abuse they could get counseling.

      The thing is, these people end up blaming some larger issue for their unhappiness. Rather than saying "I'd be happy if I just had some friends.", they say "I'd be happy if the Israelis would just stop beating up on the Palestinians." Of course, there's nothing one person can do to change the behavior of the an entire country. The problem, in their view, is hopeless. It's not just about finding some friends, it's about one person trying to change the behavior of an entire country.

      Well, here's the deal ArcherB. The situation in Iraq is not a mess because of people in the USA who opposed the war. More to the point, your own problems (whatever they are - and they do seem severe), are not the result of people in the USA opposing the Iraq war. You can blame your problems on the people who opposed the war and you can even direct all your anger toward the people who opposed the war. In the end, though, you won't solve your problems and, from what I can tell, unless you do solve your problems you're going to end up destroying yourself and those around you.

      Like I said earlier, I don't really care what you do one way or the other. You can take my advice or not. Personally, I suspect that you are beyond help. I do, however, take a certain grim satisfaction in knowing that the truth is staring you in the face even as you destroy yourself by ignoring it.

    173. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      No, it isn't. The US is subject only to that part of international law which it has acceded to by treaty.

      Fortunately the US is a signatory to all of the Geneva conventions. Moreover there are clear provisions in US law that bar torture explicitly and the US has extradition treaties that apply.

      The Congress has not repealled the Geneva Conventions. They thus remain the supreme law of the land. Opinions from the likes of Yoo or Gonzalez on their applicability can be tested in a court of law.

      Faced with the choice between the ICC and the US courts Bush and Co would be well advised to chose the ICC. At least with the ICC there is no death penalty.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    174. Re:Since when by vampirbg · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I don't take quotes from amNASTY intl as a valid source. Maybe it has something to with their constantly blaming Israel for human rights violations when they attack a rocket launcher next to an abandoned school, but remain strangely silent when rockets fall in neighborhoods filled with unarmed civilians. Maybe it's because they call the US the largest human rights abuse on earth while ignoring Rwanda, Haiti, Tibet, China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela... and so on. And how do you feel about US missile hitting a street with just civilans around (collateral damage?) or throwing cluster bombs on a town? (those are illegal) Or maybe using depleted uranium missiles in areas where there were no tanks? That icc thing don't count either. Right... Which one DOES count? Please exclude all the US government sponsored agencies... Americans have a history of genocide (only a dead Indian/German/Japanese is a good one), witch hunt (communist hunts?) and don't forget that they've financed Al'Qaeda until they turned on them :) BTW where are WMDs in Iraq? They were lying to you then, and they'll do it again...

    175. Re:Since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're capable, but yet they can't get the facts right about Iraq?
      It depends on what you define as goal. If the goal was to get into Iraq, they were capable enough to get the US military there

      They're capable, but yet they've seriously screwed up the Iraq war in multiple ways?
      If the goal was to stay in Iraq, this is the perfect pretext to do so. Given all the bases that have been built in and around the Middle-East since 9/11, you'd suspect the US army NOT to want out of Iraq nor the Middle-East.

      They're capable, but yet Paul Wolfowitz gets caught in a conflict of interest giving his girlfriend a position of authority in the World Bank?
      This was only the stick of (especially) the Europeans to hit Wolfowitz with. One of the problems the Europeans had with Wolfowitz was the arbitrary punishment of countries accused of corruption. Some countries did receive punishment, while others did not. The problem was the 'openly' geo-political use of the World Bank for US goals. Maybe in this case you can say he was not capable enough. But who knows, what really was the case.

      Somehow these things don't come from capable people.
      It depends on the goal, if the goal is the interest of joe average in the United States, they sure can not be called capable.
      If the goal is self-enrichment, power grabbing (have a look at the history of Cheney and Rumsfeld together in public office in e.g. ousting Kissinger) and serving god knows who's interest, they sure seem to be capable of doing just that.

      Seems like the actual evidence points to them being ass-clowns that screw up left and right, but until now have been able to talk their way out of it, or make friends who can do it for them.

      You can talk conspiracy theories all day long, but until you actually have evidence instead of motivations, it's nonsense. You can make up anything you damn well please if all you have is motivations to guide you.

      The problem in the end is defining capable, in the end I guess we can agree that they sure seem to be 'assclowns' in the light of the international public opinion ;)

    176. Re:Since when by russotto · · Score: 1

      The ICC is not established by the Geneva Conventions, so they aren't relevant to the question of ICC jurisdiction over US nationals.

      The chance of any US court trying Bush for anything is as close to zero as doesn't matter. The chance of any future US administration allowing Bush to be tried by the ICC is even closer to zero.

    177. Re:Since when by TeraCo · · Score: 1
      , a single attack,

      A single attack? I guess you don't have much time for world news when there is WORLDS WORST MURDERCHEFS coming up next on FOX.

      --
      Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
    178. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      The ICC is not established by the Geneva Conventions, so they aren't relevant to the question of ICC jurisdiction over US nationals.

      An irrelevant point. The ICC is simply a permanent version of the ad hoc tribunals that have been brought since Nuremberg. The recognition of the ICC as a venue can be made with retroactive effect or charges can be brought in another ad-hoc court. The US has recognized the Geneva conventions since they were first created. The US has recognized torture as a war crime before then.

      The chance of any US court trying Bush for anything is as close to zero as doesn't matter. The chance of any future US administration allowing Bush to be tried by the ICC is even closer to zero.

      Lets see what people say after all the evidence comes out, after the detailed document trail is released. Under the rules of the ICC the court can only try cases if they cannot be brought under national law. So the ICC does not have juridiction unless Bush were to attempt to pardon himself.

      The idea that future administrations headed by Bush's political enemies are going to continue to cover up for the lawlessness of his administration is naive in the extreme.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    179. Re:Since when by russotto · · Score: 1

      The idea that future administrations headed by Bush's political enemies are going to continue to cover up for the lawlessness of his administration is naive in the extreme.
      No, that's the one thing you can put in the bank. No US president is going to be willing to subject a former US president to foreign (and the ICC counts as foreign) jurisdiction for his actions while in office, for obvious reasons of self-interest. Trying him here in the US is almost as unlikely for similar reasons.
    180. Re:Since when by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      It's a numbers game. OBL and Al Qaeda have always had sympathizers through the 90's, but their popularity has only increased since the ill-fated invasion and occupation of Iraq. Increased popularity and increased recruitment make them a BIGGER threat. If the rate of recruitment exceeds the rate of catching or killing them, we lose. Understand now? Unless you're ready to enlist today, I'd say the U.S. military is just about tapped out in capacity to catch and kill more terrorists.

      Iraq has some to do with it, but 9-11 is what gave them the biggest boost. It showed them to be strong enough to take down The Great Satan. Then when we went into Iraq, those that wanted to do something got an opportunity at bargain prices because we were right next door. They no longer needed to worry about how they were going to sneak into the US and avoid detection.

      However, Iraq is very bad for Al Qaeda. It is not a big morale booster when you trained with 200 guys and 198 of them have been killed by the Marines or captured. It also doesn't help your approval rating when the best attack you can pull off is a car bomb in a crowded market or a good old mosque burning. Trust me, among the general "just want to go to work today" populace in Iraq, Al Qaeda is less popular than they are in a NY Fire station. I don't think they'll be picking up too many recruits in Iraq beyond the already bat-shit crazies anyway, and those guys were going to be terrorists one way or the other.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    181. Re:Since when by PMBjornerud · · Score: 1

      1. Fight them and attempt to deny them success in their attacks and their goal of gaining power.
      2. Don't fight them. Allow them to succeed or fail without our intervention. Wash our hands of their future and the future of their victims. Don't lead. Don't help. Don't prevent terrorist bombings. (The victims will understand. "Car accidents are bad too", we'll say.) Strawman. Try again.

      You define two strongly biased categories, then force-fit me in one of them. Are you saying there are no other possible courses of actions? Last time I checked, there were more options in the world that "do as I want" and "do absolutely nothing".

      Anyhow... Seems like a poll, so I know what do to! Missing option:
      3. Allocate a reasonable amount of resources to fight them, then go on with life.

      The amount of resources and attention terrorism is getting is simply not rational. It's off the scale, orders of magnitude. And I wouldn't be surprised if all that is happening is to increase resentment and possibly recruit more terrorists.
      --
      I lost my sig.
    182. Re:Since when by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Lazy, ignorant, apathetic, disillusioned, or any combination thereof.

      But what if you are not any of the above, and it's just that none of the candidates appeal to you? You seem to be saying there is something wrong with not voting for anybody. But what if there is not anybody worth voting for? Voting for somebody bad would be worse than not voting for anybody at all.

      So by not doing anything (like voting), people are, whether directly or indirectly, promoting bad government.

      But they are also promoting bad government by voting for any of the candidates. So, what are they to do?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    183. Re:Since when by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      No, that's the one thing you can put in the bank. No US president is going to be willing to subject a former US president to foreign (and the ICC counts as foreign) jurisdiction for his actions while in office, for obvious reasons of self-interest. Trying him here in the US is almost as unlikely for similar reasons.

      The United States is a nation of laws. Bush and Cheney have set themselves up above the law. They have to be put on trial to protect the constitution.

      They have conducted illegal wiretaps, they have used the Department of Justice for political prosecutions, they have protected their cronies from prosecution of corruption charges involving millions of dollars.

      They might have got away with those, but torture is different.

      If they do not pardon themselves they will go on trial in the US. If they do pardon themselves they will go on trial in an international court.

      And don't expect there to be many Republicans huffing an puffing in their defense. If Bush pardons himself to avoid the US courts there isn't going to be any sympathy when he faces the ICC.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    184. Re:Since when by YouTookMyStapler · · Score: 1

      have "unexplained absences been considered potential espionage indicators"?

      There were classes that I took that I hardly ever showed up to, such as my CS classes.

      FBI: You missed an awful lot of your CS classes. This means you might be a terrorist engaging in espionage, so we're going to investigate you.
      ME: I missed a lot of classes because the class was a dumb requirement and I already knew all of the info. Did you miss the part where I got an A?

    185. Re:Since when by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I think the point of the document was that people with security clearances are more at risk and if there is a problem one should be aware of security implications.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  2. FUD-O-Rama by rueger · · Score: 5, Informative
    The referring article does open with:

    US university students will not be able to work late at the campus, travel abroad, show interest in their colleagues' work, have friends outside the United States, engage in independent research, or make extra money without the prior consent of the authorities, according to a set of guidelines given to administrators by the FBI.
    It appears that that paragraph is a gross exaggeration of what the FBI is proposing, and indeed further in the article University spokespeople talk about a possible "chilling effect", not about the kind of wholesale assault on freedoms suggested.

    I don't like the FBI sticking their nose into other people's business, but let's at least try to represent the problems accurately.

    1. Re:FUD-O-Rama by johanw · · Score: 1

      They do. They are quite accurately pointing out the next step in reducing the personal freedoms in the police state that was once a free country.

    2. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Eadwacer · · Score: 5, Informative

      In fact, when you compare the blog item with the Boston Globe article, you find that the Globe makes no mention of the linked .pdf with the "guidelines" in it. Those are from a document intended for government employees, and make no sense when you try to apply them to academia. What the Globe mentions are suggestions that profs secure their laptops when overseas, and that they know who they are talking when they talk about high tech work with defense applications.

    3. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, the FBI wants people to report suspicious activity. Wow!! I'm outraged.

      The problem with the mock-outrage and crocodile tears for things like this is that it desensitizes people. When freedoms are actually, genuinely under assault, it'll get posted on Slashdot and everyone will ask "What is Slashdot whining about this time? Should I read the article to find out how it's misinformation again, or should I just save time and assume it's misinformation, like it usually is?"

      Freedom is important. It's far too important for this. It's important to be vigilant to protect it. Pretending there's an assault on freedom when there isn't don't count as vigilance -- rather it provides cover so the real anti-freedom measures get lost in the noise.

    4. Re:FUD-O-Rama by MonGuSE · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I actually don't consider this FUD since I've seen suggestions at my university for all students to have to submit a reason with evidence why they missed a class or go before academic review and possibly get a quarter off. It has not flown yet because of so many holes in the argument but I was wondering why it even mattered that much. Sometimes people need a day off, in America we don't get enough of them anymore. Although I will admit students have it comparatively easy in relation to working stiffs.

      Also if you watched the Daily Show on Thursday John had a guy on promoting his new book called 'Quantico' that had some interesting information about his interactions with the FBI. He specifically stated that in the near future there would be surveillance tech installed at all campuses assumably in an attempt to combat domestic terrorism. Because you know so much of it happens on a school campus. He also said the higher ups in the homeland security divisions, in the meetings he got to attend and discuss matters with them are showing a keen interest into this 'new' arena of terrorism and not concerned with foreign terrorists as much anymore.

      This all sounds like big brother and McCarthyism combined. Do we never learn that while we need agencies looking for the next terrorist attack what we don't need is to create an environment in which we loose the very things we are trying to protect. Whack a mole indeed.

      The only information they need to disseminate is be vigilante, it is everyone's responsibility. By trying to become big brother no one is vigilant because they either hate big brother and don't want to help him or they have a false sense of security.

      Lastly profiling does not work as one would assume. You can always find things about people that seem to fit into a 'mold' but really it is a self fulfilling prophecy. Profiling only helps to give you a general idea of who you may or may not be looking for but the person you are looking for may not fit that profile and a person that fits that profile is more than likely not to be who you are looking for. Its just a tool to help you get started in a direction when you don't have better evidence to go with or to possibly help you out when you get desperate. When you apply it with no context or no crime then it becomes worthless because you get 99.99% false positives and when you get that .01% positive your already assuming that its a false positive and overlook it. This new approach by the FBI is wrong on so many levels its retarded. Everyone is a criminal unless cleared...

    5. Re:FUD-O-Rama by fredklein · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the FBI wants people to report suspicious activity. Wow!! I'm outraged.


      Since when is having a bit of cash ("Unexplained affluence") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is failign to bore people with every detail of your vacation ("failing to report overseas travel,") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is curiosity ("showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is working a night job ("keeping unusual work hours") a suspicious activity?
      etc.
      etc.

    6. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Don't actually pay attention to the point I made. Get distracted by irrelevant stuff.

      So your opinion of what's suspicious and your cartoon-version interpretation of the FBI's opinion differ. Good for you. How does that make this article correct? What freedom is taken away by the FBI asking people to watch out for certain behaviors?

    7. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The right to privacy.

    8. Re:FUD-O-Rama by fredklein · · Score: 5, Insightful
      So your opinion of what's suspicious and your cartoon-version interpretation of the FBI's opinion differ.

      The Govt is what is 'cartoonish'.
      Stolen from : http://www.hoboes.com/Mimsy/?ART=96:

      Back in 1991, the Pittsburgh Press did a survey of reasons for DEA agents taking people's money when they come off of airplanes. It was classic profiling:

      Agents in Illinois are told its suspicious if their subjects are among the first people off a plane, because it shows they're in a hurry.
      In Michigan, the DEA says that being the last off a plane is suspicious because the subject is trying to appear unconcerned.
      And in Ohio, agents are told suspicion should surface when suspects deplane in the middle of a group because they may be trying to lose themselves in the crowd.


      What freedom is taken away by the FBI asking people to watch out for certain behaviors

      Nothing.

      IF the behaviours are not unreasonable vague.

      The list of behaviours mentioned here IS unreasonably vague.

      It creates a surveilance society. People become afraid to do or say anything because their neighbors might report them for 'suspicious activity'. "I tell you, officer, they left town last week, and didn't tell everyone about their travel plans." "The father leaves for work WAY to early, and gets home late sometimes..." "They bought a new car last week. Where'd they get the cash? Must be terrorists..."
    9. Re:FUD-O-Rama by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      The problem is that outrage fatigue has long set in. The only way to limit the abuse of their power is to neuter them completely by creating blanket distrust in government.

      Wait, we're talking about the FBI? Crap, I thought it was the EPA.

    10. Re:FUD-O-Rama by drooling-dog · · Score: 1

      Pretending there's an assault on freedom when there isn't don't count as vigilance -- rather it provides cover so the real anti-freedom measures get lost in the noise. Of course, there are those -- perhaps you are among them -- for whom any assault on freedom is going to be dismissable as FUD, or as something that only affects other people, or as something that we ought not fear if we're "not doing anything wrong".

      I've heard it said that most subjects of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy had no idea that they weren't "free", mainly because they had no interest in participating politically in their societies anyway and knew how to stay out of trouble. So I have to ask, how do you know you're free, and what would the evidence look like that maybe you aren't so much anymore?
    11. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 1

      And you think that the FBI gets off on following up on completely useless tips? Or maybe you think they can't tell the difference between suspicious and ordinary, even though you seem to have no trouble?

      It creates a surveilance society.

      You mentioned the "surveillance society" buzzword. I profess the appropriate, socially-acceptable emotions about the "surveillance society" and agree with everyone who is on our side. Let's all feel good about ourselves and celebrate our grasp of current events.

    12. Re:FUD-O-Rama by gorehog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know

      Look at this list. The problem with it is that it takes things that are NORMAL for intellectuals to try to do and calls them suspicious.

      I always thought the "need to know" was assumed to be granted to the people except in special cases where the government classifies information. If it's not specifically restricted then we have a right to it. This mandate from the Feds puts students and professors under a nasty microscope.

      How does one explain their affluence? Most rich people are never asked where the money came from. Interrogating affluence leads to nothing more than vindictive sophistry.

      Who do I have to report overseas travel to? Isn't it enough to inform the State Department that I travel? now I have to report my summer vacation plans to the school administration?

      Information outside the job scope? So, if I'm a humanities student and taking welding classes at night I'm a terrorist?

      A lot of people go into academics because of the flexible schedule. In that context what are unusual hours?

      Unreported contacts with foreign nationals? Aside from academic and intellectual interest in world affairs and the question of who is the supervisor waiting for a report...this is a violation of the fourth (fifth?) amendment protections which guarantee you to be secure in your personal effects. Oh yeah...there's also something about freedom of speech.

      unreported contact with foreign government? same as above. WTF, if I choose to emigrate I have to inform my school administration?

      I've only provided one example per case. What it comes down to is that EVERY item on that list has many many legitimate purposes to exist. What the FBI might really be on about here is the chance that aggressive academics might be able to make a case for toppling this government by legal means. I think the Feds are circling wagons and playing defense.

    13. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Godwin's law.

      Also, a complete strawman. So we should believe misinformation on Slashdot because someone once didn't believe genuine information?

      I'm still not sure I understand your point. How is the misinformation is useful again?

      ---

      So I have to ask, how do you know you're free, and what would the evidence look like that maybe you aren't so much anymore?

      Is "believing misinformation" the right answer? Is outrage at the ordinary supposed to be my guide?

      I could look at all the people who the US killed at the death camps in Guantanamo Bay (zero at last count). I could look at all the US citizens who have been falsely imprisoned for terrorism -- but no one can ever come up with a list of names. So it's hard.

      I could look at my tax bill and see how free I am, I guess.

    14. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Once again, these are not relevant points. You can congratulate yourself for spotting something inconsistent all you want.

      When someone says "The FBI is coming in their uniforms to get us all!", it's not really useful to point out that the FBI generally doesn't wear uniforms -- they tend to wear suits. But the point, again, is that they're not coming to get us all.

      The article says that the FBI is asking people to watch out for certain behaviors. Who is less free because of that? What are they less free to do? What freedom has been taken away?

      What the FBI might really be on about here is the chance that aggressive academics might be able to make a case for toppling this government by legal means. I think the Feds are circling wagons and playing defense.

      I suggest building a concrete bunker. Maybe you still have one from Y2K. And tinfoil hats -- always.

    15. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What freedom is taken away by the FBI asking people to watch out for certain behaviors

      Nothing.

      IF the behaviours are not unreasonable vague.

      The list of behaviours mentioned here IS unreasonably vague.

      Actually, they aren't because the FBI is looking for patterns of behaviour that may indicate someone is an espionage agent; any one is not really that odd or troubling but a set of them, over time, *may* warrant further investigation.

      The list is the result of post-mortums of espionage cases to look for potential warning signs.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    16. Re:FUD-O-Rama by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

      Since when is working a night job ("keeping unusual work hours") a suspicious activity?

      This is university we're talking about. Surely FAILING to pull all-nighters would be the suspicious activity.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    17. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      It appears that that paragraph is a gross exaggeration of what the FBI is proposing,

      I don't know, it sounds pretty accurate to me. Oh you can still DO any of those things, just do to many or the wrong ones and you're an espionage suspect.

      further in the article University spokespeople talk about a possible "chilling effect", not about the kind of wholesale assault on freedoms suggested.

      chilling effects aren't a wholesale assault on freedom? What's the difference? If people are afraid of working late , or expressing interest outside of narrow parameters because they think they'll be thought a spy how is that not an assault of freedom?

      Good god. It's like we're trying to establish the freaking Stasi here in the United States!

      --
      AccountKiller
    18. Re:FUD-O-Rama by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, they aren't because the FBI is looking for patterns of behaviour that may indicate someone is an espionage agent; any one is not really that odd or troubling but a set of them, over time, *may* warrant further investigation.
      Actually, when all behaviors (first, last, or somewhere in the middle of getting off a plane) are suspicious, everyone is suspect, and anyone can be pulled aside and one of those reasons given as retroactive justification.

      Now if you don't mind, I have to get an APB out on a white male, 17 to 34, with or without a beard, maybe a tattoo, who is impotent. Let's go.

      (An off-topic aside, but the deplaning suspicions reminded me of a children's story with ducklings getting on a boat where the last one to get on board would get a snap of a whip on his backside to encourage him to be faster getting aboard next time, leading the one that was always last running away to avoid the whip. I've been wanting to pick up a copy, but I just can't remember the name of the story. It would have come out before 1980. Terrible ending: after being left alone (for a day?), on the next visit of the boat he returned, was last aboard, and got whipped again, but was happy to be back aboard regardless.)
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    19. Re:FUD-O-Rama by gorehog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are wrong. Eliminating wrong leads is one thing. Investigating people where no crime has been committed? That is wrong. What is not relevant about the FBI asking for reports on innocent activities? Do you really want the FBI researching every dead end that college administrators could generate?

      I never said anything about the FBI coming to get us all. They just want to chill the elements in society who might investigate them. Notice, please, that this request was not made to Construction companies or Bankers. So, on this, you are right. They're not after us all, they're only after people in Academia. But that was stated in the article, right?

      They are NOT specifying behaviors. They're not saying "Turn in anyone who spends a lot of time picking locks" or "Please let us know if anyone you see buys a lot of diesel fuel and fertilizer." That's behavior. The FBI is asking people to make judgments and then turn someone in based on that judgment. So, Psych Department head says "Gee, does Adjunct Ahmed really need to know how to use a backhoe? Why IS he learning that? " And he speed dials the FBI, and next thing you know, Ahmed is being investigated because he wanted to do some landscaping without telling anyone.

      It's not crazy at this point in this administration to expect illegal, unethical, and immoral behavior from the government. In fact I am simply stating the worst case scenario because I will no longer give the benefit of the doubt. If you want me to believe the good intentions of the FBI then the FBI will have to demonstrate those good intentions and not expect me to grant them "the benefit of doubt." In fact, given all the evidence at hand it is ignorant and stupid to not expect the worst from the current administration.

    20. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      I could look at all the people who the US killed at the death camps in Guantanamo Bay (zero at last count). I could look at all the US citizens who have been falsely imprisoned for terrorism -- but no one can ever come up with a list of names. So it's hard.

      The number of people who have died during interrogation is certainly greater than zero. We don't know the details as they refuse to prosecute unless they have no alternative and when they do prosecute they give the officers immunity to testify against the enlisted men.

      It is called a cover-up.

      If the FBI want to look into domestic supporters of terrorism they could take a look at all the New York City politicians who have supported NORAID over the years under the pretence that it is not an IRA fundraising front. People like Rudy Giuliani.

      As for there being no US citizens being imprisoned illegally, I don't think that the Padilla or Hamdi cases will stand up.

      And yes, it is quite likely that they actually were terrorists, but at this point there is absolutely no possibility of a safe conviction. I also expect that John Walker Lindh ends up getting released long before he would have done if the law had been followed.

      We tried the extra-legal approach in the UK when the IRA started their campaign. It was a total failure and only made the situation worse.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    21. Re:FUD-O-Rama by turtledawn · · Score: 1

      I had a copy of that story in a children's literature anthology. It's called "The Story About Ping."

      --
      Uh, "if it looks roughly mouse-shaped according to my infra-red sensitive pit, eat it"? --Chris Burke 09-08-10
    22. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Descalzo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Since when is having a bit of cash ("Unexplained affluence") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is failing to bore people with every detail of your vacation ("failing to report overseas travel,") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is curiosity ("showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is working a night job ("keeping unusual work hours") a suspicious activity?
      Are you serious? This is how they catch people. These are the very first things the FBI (for example) looks into when granting security clearance.

      It's like saying, "Since when is a high heart-rate bad for you? I work out all the time and have a high heart-rate every day!" and getting pissed when the nurse takes your pulse as soon as you walk into the clinic!

      When I worked at the grocery store, part of my job was to catch shoplifters. An expert told me, "You can tell the shoplifters because they are watching you, not their shopping." Now does everyone that looks at the night manager a shoplifter? Of course not, and only a fool would believe it, and only a bigger fool would suggest it. But the idea that you can detect shoplifters by seeing what they are watching is still extremely useful. It's the unusual-ness that makes it suspicious. It's a judgment call in the grocery business, and I imagine it is in the industrial counter-espionage business as well.

      Over the decades, people whose job it is to prevent espionage of all types have come to the conclusion that unexplained affluence, unusual interest outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, etc., etc., are good indicators of suspicious activities.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    23. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Kohath · · Score: 1

      That was a lot of text that doesn't point out who lost their freedom, nor does it say what freedom was lost.

      Investigating people where no crime has been committed? That is wrong.

      Preventing crimes from being committed is always "wrong" then.

      Also, "the benefit of doubt" is for when there are multiple reasonable explanations for things. It doesn't apply to paranoia or delusions of grandeur or kooky conspiracy theories.

    24. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

      Who do I have to report overseas travel to? Isn't it enough to inform the State Department that I travel? now I have to report my summer vacation plans to the school administration?
      You have to report your travel plans to the State Department? What COUNTRY do you live in?! I mean, I've heard that the US is pretty much a Fascist dictatorship now, but I had no idea how bad it had gotten. Did Al Q'aida succeed in their plans to take away Americans' freedom, and I just missed the news?
    25. Re:FUD-O-Rama by dweebzilla · · Score: 1

      So that rash trip to Amsterdam with Sally Van Der Kloot using cash we won betting at the track, that 'extended' spring break by a week would be viewed as a bad thing?

      --
      Get your tagline off my lawn.
    26. Re:FUD-O-Rama by mcguiver · · Score: 1

      You are missing the point of the article. The list from the FBI is not for each and every student, it is those with security clearances. Many universities are doing research projects for the government that require security clearances in order to do the research. If you are given access to secure information then it makes sense that you would be asked to document your communications and travels to foreign countries. If you have access to confidential information your supervisor is justified in getting a little suspicious if you suddenly start coming into work late at night when no one else is around. It would look kind of suspicious if you are asking about information regarding the classified project that you have no need to know.

      This list has nothing to do with your average student. A humanities major taking a welding class is not suspicious neither is a group of students taking a spring break to China, nor are students pulling all nighters suspicious. Most students don't have any information that a foreign government would be interested in. This list is focused on students who have access to classified information. If you are working on a classified project and suddenly decide to emigrate to another country, well, don't you think that might look suspicious?

    27. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Preventing crimes from being committed is always "wrong" then.

      Nice job setting up a straw man, you fucking, ignorant asshole. YOU are the moron who injected ALWAYS into the conversation. It's clear to anyone who believes in the Constitution that there's a middle ground between "preventing crimes is ALWAYS wrong" and living under constant police surveillance. It's called "REASONABLE CAUSE", you stupid son of a bitch.

      That was a lot of text that doesn't point out who lost their freedom, nor does it say what freedom was lost.

      You just don't understand the word "chilling", do you? Sure you're free to go where you want, but wouldn't you feel inhibited from visiting friends who were foreign nationals if you had to think in advance what construction might be put on it by the guy who parks outside your house, follows you to and from work, always shows up to eat in the same restaurant as you and shows up in the seat behind you and your date every time you take in a movie?

      This is exactly the same police state behavior that my daughter encountered some years back. She was dating a guy in a very affluent nearby town and drove to his house in a ratty old VW bug. As soon as she entered the town limits, she was tailed for many blocks by a cop, who finally tagged her for failing to make a full wheel stop at an arterial (stop) sign. The message was clear -- we don't want your kind around here.

      I have a friend in another state who was always being stopped for bullshit reasons by the local cops. He worked nights in a factory, didn't shave a lot, generally looked scruffy and drove an older car. One night, he slowed down and was redlighted by a cop. He took the nearby offramp and was told he was being tagged for driving too slowly on a freeway. When he explained that he was approaching his turnoff when redlighted, the bastard cop tagged him for turning off without signaling, which he had done because the he was under the cop's direction to pull off the freeway. All of this horseshit stopped when he started diving a brand new car to work. Funny.

      Need more? It's now cause for a stop and harassment to drive fully within the law. Years back, it was routine for the Nevada highway patrol to stop anyone out in the boonies who was driving a nice car under the speed limit. The reason was always some BS reason like "weaving in traffic" or some other canard that's impossible to defend against. This gave the cop an opportunity to see if the driver was black and, preferably, if he had fast food containers on the floor. This was considered reasonable cause to search the car for drugs.

      The position was that drug runners drove nice cars, didn't waste time stopping to eat at restaurants and drove well inside the limit so as not to get stopped for speeding. Extra points if the driver was black.

      If you think having to live with the state breathing down your neck all the time, looking for trouble in anything you do, does not equate to a loss of freedom, I have to wonder exactly which totalitarian state you're from.

      Go on, dipshit -- attack me fo my language -- it's perfectly OK wih me if you choose to ignore the substance of what I've said.

    28. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Since when is having a bit of cash ("Unexplained affluence") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is failign to bore people with every detail of your vacation ("failing to report overseas travel,") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is curiosity ("showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope") a suspicious activity?
      Since when is working a night job ("keeping unusual work hours") a suspicious activity?
      etc.
      etc.


      It isn't, unless you hold a security clearance and are working on sensitive projects; then you must report foreign travel and those other things are simply things to be aware of - as was pointed out in the guideline the article linked which were designed for organizations working on sensitive or classified projects.

      The FBI is concerned that University researchers may not be aware of potential espionage threats and would like them to be aware of the threat and how to recognize *potential* attempts at espionage and what to do if they become suspicious.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    29. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you sound a bit less coherent please? Because right now while you do sound like a rambling idiot your comment is still well formatted and uses mostly correct spelling and grammar... that's about all you have going for it

    30. Re:FUD-O-Rama by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      It's al Qa`ida, not al Q`aida. The `ayn follows the alif.

      Now, if al Qa`ida were motivated by political idealism rather than religious idealism, it would be proper to imply that the US becoming a police state[1] coincides with their goals. Since they are a religious organization, the majority of the US population would have to convert to Islam -- and preferably offer some sort of apology to all of the Middle East except for Israel -- to appease them.

      As for reporting [international] travel to the FBI, that's probably standard procedure if you have a security clearance, and not surprising.

      [1] "Police state" refers to a level of freedom and means of enforcement. "Fascist dictatorship" refers to a mode of government (dictatorship) and means of market regulation and flavor of propaganda (Fascist).

    31. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

      Regarding Al-Qaeda, that comment was simply intended as humour. After all, doesn't the US government constantly blather about terrorists wanting to take away western freedoms?

      Needless to say, I know that in many countries (including my own), people with security clearance are still permitted to travel freely without having to tell their parents... I mean government, where they are.

      Finally, fascist dictatorship was precisely what I meant. The US uses propaganda extensively, uses war to stimulate the economy, has elections that are so corrupt as to be meaningless, and is becoming a police state. All four are traditional components of fascism.

    32. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Paco103 · · Score: 1

      Well I for one did NOT go to a university to learn things outside of my immediate job needs. What kind of silly person would do THAT?!

      I also report to my school every time I call my German friend, that was an exchange student here. Doesn't everyone report all their personal calls to the school?

      I also cleared with my dean when I planned my vacation to Cancun. Do some people think having a passport and the OK from both governments is all they need? Oh, and a Visa where needed. Craziness I swear!

      Oh yeah, and every college student I've ever met maintained a normal 8-5 job. Why would a student ever work nights? Nobody ELSE in this country ever does!!!

    33. Re:FUD-O-Rama by jlarocco · · Score: 1

      This?

      I only remember the book because of that first review.

    34. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Jehosephat2k · · Score: 1

      Surveilance society. My favorite!

      http://www.safetystate.com/

    35. Re:FUD-O-Rama by drooling-dog · · Score: 1

      Godwin's law. Not an issue, since I wasn't comparing any contemporary ideology to Nazism, but merely speculating on the perceptions of people who lived under that very real regime in that very real time. Or are you taking "Godwin's Law" one step further by denying that these things ever happened?

      I'll deal with "Godwin's Law" another time. Suffice it for now to say that it smells like an effort among rightists to void the historical record of what indeed does happen when the power of the state marries corporate and religious power, to paraphrase Mussolini. But I suppose he is of no historical significance, either.

      I could look at my tax bill and see how free I am, I guess. Or you could look at how it's spent. Be thankful (!) that our current government is deferring the cost of its Holy War to your children, and not you. I doubt they could have started it otherwise...
    36. Re:FUD-O-Rama by fredklein · · Score: 1

      And you think that the FBI gets off on following up on completely useless tips?

      Well, you see, there is this thing called 'Data Mining'. For it to work best, the database that is 'mined' needs to have as much data as possible. So, while the FBI may not "get off" of following up every tip, they may very well 'get off' by entering every tip into a huge database.

      Or maybe you think they can't tell the difference between suspicious and ordinary, even though you seem to have no trouble?

      I posted one such example in the post you replied to. (Okay, it was the DEA, not the FBI. DO you REALLY think they are that different?)

    37. Re:FUD-O-Rama by mochan_s · · Score: 1

      An expert told me, "You can tell the shoplifters because they are watching you, not their shopping." Now does everyone that looks at the night manager a shoplifter? Of course not, and only a fool would believe it, and only a bigger fool would suggest it. But the idea that you can detect shoplifters by seeing what they are watching is still extremely useful. It's the unusual-ness that makes it suspicious. It's a judgment call in the grocery business, and I imagine it is in the industrial counter-espionage business as well.

      I remember in some statistics class that for a test to be useful there is a certain criteria (like significant enough percentage) of false positive and false negatives. Otherwise the test is useless as randomly stopping people would probably fare equally or better. So, at least probability that the test is positive and the student is a spy must be higher than a randomly selected student is a spy. I'm not sure how that is factors in but the probability that the test is negative and the student is a spy also comes into play.

      Also, given student is a spy and what are the probabilities that he/she is positive or negative on the test.

      Are you serious? This is how they catch people. These are the very first things the FBI (for example) looks into when granting security clearance. It's like saying, "Since when is a high heart-rate bad for you? I work out all the time and have a high heart-rate every day!" and getting pissed when the nurse takes your pulse as soon as you walk into the clinic!

      That is where vagueness comes in. The probabilities of such things would be insignificant to conclude anything.

      However, it probably works on one level - that is psychologically. It's like saying certain thing is guarded on a sign - like casinos. It makes a potential spy think twice.

    38. Re:FUD-O-Rama by fredklein · · Score: 1

      But the idea that you can detect shoplifters by seeing what they are watching is still extremely useful.

      Unfortunately, it's complete BS. Any 'good' shoplifter will KNOW you are looking for people who are watching the employees, and will deliberately NOT look at you. Sure, you'll catch a few kids and amateurs, but the 'pros' will breeze right by you.

      An expert told me, "You can tell the shoplifters because they are watching you, not their shopping." Now does everyone that looks at the night manager a shoplifter? Of course not, and only a fool would believe it, and only a bigger fool would suggest it.

      Then your "expert" was a big fool. How can "shoplifters watch the employees" WITHOUT looking at them? Looking at them is a prerqeuisite for 'watching' them. Wher eis the line drawn between 'looking' and 'watching'??

    39. Re:FUD-O-Rama by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Investigating people where no crime has been committed? That is wrong.

      Espionage and terrorism are the type of crimes where you either want to investigate them before they happen, or if you don't investigate, you don't know if they did happen. And if you believe these crimes don't exist, you're stupid.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    40. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Bazer · · Score: 1

      This has been stated before and I'll state it again: They are creating a surveillance society. Period.

      It's their job to look for spies and not of a university's staff. By asking them to look out for suspicious activity they are instilling paranoia into people. Look what's happening in my country, Poland. Before 1989 the secret police (SB - "Security Service" as they we're called) was doing just exactly what the FBI are doing right now, just the scale is not the same. Here, there were posters all over the place saying: "Keep your bussiness secrets safe. Someone may want to pry it from you right now." or "Keep national secret's safe"(although this one may be less appropriate here). Anyone who was even remotely connected with someone "suspicious", had literally shitloads of documents written about.

      IMHO you are on the beginning of a very slippery slope. The same one the whole eastern block went. Judging from the attitude in the US I can only say: enjoy your ride.

    41. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I remember a story about a situation like this... something to do with a boy crying wolf or something?

      I'm definitely not in favor of losing rights and/or starting a witch-hunt, but sooner or later people are going to stop listening to the cries of wolf.

    42. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't read for comprehension very well do you?

      And you're a liar.

    43. Re:FUD-O-Rama by everphilski · · Score: 1

      If a so-called 'pro' is shoplifting a grocery store, well, that's pretty sad...

    44. Re:FUD-O-Rama by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      "The article says that the FBI is asking people to watch out for certain behaviors. Who is less free because of that? What are they less free to do? What freedom has been taken away?"

      The FBI is asking students, teachers and researchers to spy on their fellow colleagues and report anything they may consider suspect.

      Tell the FBI the KGB is calling. They want their old manuals back.

    45. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Lockejaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those are from a document intended for government employees, and make no sense when you try to apply them to academia.
      Yes, those guidelines seem like they would generate a lot of false positives at a university:
      • unexplained affluence -- generally it's just some kid with parents who pay for everything
      • failing to report overseas travel -- to whom? it's really not the university's business
      • showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope -- many students are still discovering new interests
      • keeping unusual work hours -- I thought this was the norm for college students
      • unreported contacts with foreign nationals -- sounds like they're expected to log all their internet discussions
      • unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials -- this actually sounds reasonable
      • attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know -- this may be reasonable, depending on what they're trying to access
      • unexplained absences -- again, this is pretty typical for college students
      --
      (IANAL)
    46. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Domini · · Score: 1

      Didn't you know?

      "Suspicion breeds confidence!"

      lol.

      Report your fellow citizen, Big Brother will reward you!

    47. Re:FUD-O-Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article says that the FBI is asking people to watch out for certain behaviors. Who is less free because of that? What are they less free to do? What freedom has been taken away?

      the operative question here is - what will the FBI do when *your* italian vacation is reported as being terroristicly suspicious?

      will they knock on your door and ask you a few questions? will they photograph you in your front yard? will they tap your phone? will they get your web surfing activity?

      is anything resonating?
    48. Re:FUD-O-Rama by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      "Look at this list. The problem with it is that it takes things that are NORMAL for intellectuals to try to do and calls them suspicious." ...which is precisely why it's FUD.

      All of those things ARE 'espionage indicators' and are commonly present when someone is committing or attempting to commit espionage. Then again, breathing, eating food, and wanting sex are all quite common traits of people that might be wanting to commmit espionage.

      While I think the image of the omniscient and nearly omnipotent government cabal sneaking through our lives is cute in a 1960's way, on a practical level, these 'indicators' are nearly useless - they apply to so many people (particularly Uni students, as you point out) that their false-positive rate makes them senseless.

      FUD.

      --
      -Styopa
    49. Re:FUD-O-Rama by HardCase · · Score: 1

      ...you fucking, ignorant asshole.

      Well, that didn't take long. There has to be a corollary to Godwin's law in this.

    50. Re:FUD-O-Rama by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      How can "shoplifters watch the employees" WITHOUT looking at them? Looking at them is a prerqeuisite for 'watching' them. Wher eis the line drawn between 'looking' and 'watching'?? do we really have to go through all of this again? I dunno about shoplifters, but anyhow there is no line drawn between looking and watching. That's basically what's so exciting about watching: since you're looking, you might as well be watching! for us! or yourself! You can watch without looking: sun-glasses, cameras (come in two varieties: photo and video), peripheral vision, mirrors, semi-transparent mirrors, binoculars, telescopes, shadows, other people's behavior, satellites, phones, hats, notebooks, veils, internet... visually impaired? get the glasses! blind? ears, man, you can even watch with your ears! hell, sometimes you can pretty much know where somebody is without any looking or watching whatsoever. Did I mention smell?
    51. Re:FUD-O-Rama by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      And you think that the FBI gets off on following up on completely useless tips? No, I think they'll be following up only the useful tips. Useful to them, which means to us, or something like that...
    52. Re:FUD-O-Rama by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      The article says that the FBI is asking people to watch out for certain behaviors. Who is less free because of that? What are they less free to do? What freedom has been taken away? Ok Sherlock, here is one for you: say your collegue from the class and her boyfriend want to go for a summer vacation to Syria: you know, they'll lend in Germany, then take a bit of travel through west europa, east europa, turkey, then syria, and in reverse back to US. You also find, say unintentionally overhear, that they're not going to report or even tell the actual destination of their travel to anybody. What do you do under the duties of a watchful citizen?
    53. Re:FUD-O-Rama by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

      The media always gets everything wrong. Quite honestly, I would rather they got it wrong in a way that upsets the public enough to say "Oh no, you're not going to do *that*" in this particular case, rather than getting it wrong in downplaying how much of a threat this is to free speech.

      --
      "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  3. We all must agree by lufo · · Score: 5, Funny

    unreported contact with foreign [...] intelligence officials As well as been called by a 00 number and introducing themselves as "Surname, Name Surname" might be considered highly suspiciuos.
    1. Re:We all must agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Surname, Name Surname"

      I see what you did there.
  4. Paranoid by Wellington+Grey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Federal agents are visiting some of the New England's top universities... to warn university heads about the dangers of foreign spies and terrorists stealing sensitive academic research.

    FBI is offering to brief faculty, students and staff on what it calls "espionage indicators" aimed at identifying foreign agents.

    Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.


    What a paranoid and counterproductive list. Isn't the information in bold just about everyone who works in academia?

    -Grey

    1. Re:Paranoid by shystershep · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perhaps you missed the word 'unusual.' If it is something that everyone in academia does, it wouldn't be unusual, now would it?

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and academia is riddled with Communists. They must be watched for the good of the nation. Duh.

    3. Re:Paranoid by Wellington+Grey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps you missed the word 'unusual.'


      Well, it's been my experience that the 'usual' person isn't interested in anything that wasn't on TV, so this would have quite a chilling effect for anyone, like myself, who actually enjoys learning things.

      -Grey
    4. Re:Paranoid by Gorshkov · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.
      What a paranoid and counterproductive list. Isn't the information in bold just about everyone who works in academia?
      Actually, it's neither paranoid or counterproductive .... if you're working for a defense contractor, the government, or the military directly.

      It's a pretty standard set of criteria that's probably been in use since the mid-'50s ... and is very usefull.

      It's just not applicable in an academic environment. This isn't an attempt to curtail freedoms as much as it is an example of total ignorance of how academia works.
    5. Re:Paranoid by shystershep · · Score: 1

      You certainly are 'usual' for Slashdot: misreading, either deliberately or through ignorance, anything that may not support your opinion. Perhaps, just perhaps, someone could consider what is 'usual' or 'unusual' in context. Crazy, I know, but it could happen. Especially since it isn't the evil government that will be applying these guidelines. (In fact, as another poster has pointed out, these guidelines have nothing to do with what this pathetic excuse for a story claims - they are for government employees, and have not been supplied and/or suggested to universities.)

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    6. Re:Paranoid by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      What a paranoid and counterproductive list. Isn't the information in bold just about everyone who works in academia? That's the standard list they tell people to watch out for. I've only ever heard it in conjunction with people working on classified programs.

      As you pointed out, it seems very out of place for academia. My guess is that somebody just took the boilerplate they put in all of the standard security briefings and cut-n-pasted it without actually thinking about it. Surprisingly, that's how far too much "security" is done - take the procedures someone else decided was OK and assume it is OK for whatever the current situation is. CYA at its finest.
      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:Paranoid by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      Yeah.

      I tend to fail to report contacts with foreign nationals (did it a few months ago, Oh Nooes!). I have an unusually high interest in producing 3d animation and outer space. My 'job scope' is Computer Science. I keep unusual work hours regularly - and on campus. And Sometimes I play hookiee.

      I guess I should watch my back for spooks huh?

    8. Re:Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps, just perhaps, someone could consider what is 'usual' or 'unusual' in context.

      And how much context will it get?

      Some guy who never stays on campus past 5PM is suddenly there 'til 3AM three days in a row... terrorist? Or term paper? A computer engineer takes some foreign language classes... terrorist? Or considering an international business minor or a job in software translation? How much money do you think the FBI will spend looking for the reason before just rushing in and busting the guy? After all, it would be terrible if the FBI did nothing and yet another person on top of the hundreds that get mudered all of the time ended up getting killed.

      I'm sure you and others will wave their hands and hyperventilate while insisting that they are sure that the government will somehow not fuck it up, but you're going to have to try harder than that.

    9. Re:Paranoid by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      ...showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals...


      These things are pretty much expected of me in my job.
      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    10. Re:Paranoid by mrvan · · Score: 1

      The question is: How many % of your research budget comes from DARPA / DoD / ... ? In some universities and some fields I think this can be quite high. There is a tension between the openness and curiosity normal in academia and the closedness required by national security.

    11. Re:Paranoid by porcupine8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In that case, I challenge you to tell me what working hours would be distinctly unusual in academia. Some people work 9-5, some people work noon-midnight, some people work on the weekends and Wednesday, some people work from home unless they have a class or meeting, some people come in for a while in the morning and then again after dinner... Nothing is particularly usual or unusual, particularly if the academic in question doesn't have a family to get home to (including those whose families live in a different place).

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    12. Re:Paranoid by simon_c_heath · · Score: 2, Funny
      Sorry, just had to reply to your signature. What part of being a village idiot requires unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals etc.?

      Cheers,

      Simon

    13. Re:Paranoid by Babbster · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm sure you and others will wave their hands and hyperventilate while insisting that they are sure that the government will somehow not fuck it up, but you're going to have to try harder than that.

      Not fuck what up? Taking a report from someone at a university who finds a set of traits and activities of a particular person suspicious and then following up said report with an investigation of the circumstances behind the "suspicious" information? "Hey, why did you work late in the lab last week?" "I had to get some work done." "Really?" "Yeah." "Okay, thanks. Good luck with the project!"

      People in this discussion are acting like the FBI is setting up field offices on college campuses in order to nab spies. That's not the case. The linked article only says that the FBI is offering to brief college staffs on possible warning signs that could indicate espionage activity. There's no mandate to attend such briefings, there's no requirement to report anything and there's certainly no per-university quota requiring a particular number of reports be filed per semester. The FBI is offering information and that is all. This is a total non-story.
    14. Re:Paranoid by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      You laugh, but most American Communist/Socialists reside academia. Keep in mind that those in academia are constantly trying to "reinvent the wheel". So naturally those in academia (vs. any other organization) would be against anything of the status-quo...like conservatism and capitalism.

      Too bad history isn't at the top of the aforementioned people's list.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    15. Re:Paranoid by mikael · · Score: 1

      As a registered village idiot, you are required by the Mational Association of Village Idiots to attend at least two national national trade conferences and one international trade each year. Associate village idiots need only attend one national trade conference, and student village idiots need only take out a student membership which provides a free
      subscription to the conference proceedings. Exceptions to this rule are provided in extreme personal circumstances.
      The red-eye flights to the conference really mess up your body clock.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    16. Re:Paranoid by shystershep · · Score: 1

      I'll try not to hyperventilate if you work on your reading comprehension skills. Even the limited facts in the blog that this story links to, steaming pile of tripe that it is, indicate only that the FBI is offering to give information to universities, and is asking for universities to report suspicious behavior.

      Or, if it wouldn't offend you to seek out facts that may not flatter your opinions quite as much as the blog does, you might take a look at the original article. But then you might realize that the FBI is only asking that university safeguard their sensitive research, and that the guidelines the blogger found somewhere don't come into this at all. The blogger just pulled the whole 'the FBI is out to get you' angle out of his or her ass, and from what I'm seeing here got exactly the reaction he or she hoped for from people so eager to see evil everywhere that they can't be bothered to think for themselves.

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    17. Re:Paranoid by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      It's a pretty standard set of criteria that's probably been in use since the mid-'50s ... and is very usefull.

      Do you have any evidence to show it's useful? It sure sounds like nonsense paranoia to me. And it's not like we haven't had a large set of high level officials that've been busted for espionage after years spent doing it. Aldrich Ames comes to mind. He operated for at least 9 years as a foreign spy right under the noses of the CIA. I don't know what brought him down, but I doubt it was someone noticing he worked late hours.

      --
      AccountKiller
    18. Re:Paranoid by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Entertainingly enough, academia is also one of the few places where you still see real capitalists (and they might even eat lunch with the socialists!). The business world has been taken over by a pseudo-capitalism that's perfectly in favor of anti-capitalistic things like subsidies and government monopolies as long as it benefits them. The populace has been absorbed by some sort of neo-populism (exemplified by talking heads like Lou Dobbs). University economics departments are some of the few places where you'll find people who stick to capitalistic principles, instead of some conveniently-defined mutation thereof.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    19. Re:Paranoid by pimpimpim · · Score: 1
      you forgot to bold 'unreported contacts with foreign nationals'. Often scientists have a lot of foreign contacts, friends from previous work outside of the country, colleagues at other universities etc. Also you forgot 'attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know'. I like that one the most. If there should be a "need to know", then why not shut off all universities in the US and turn them into churches. The bible makes sure that there is no "need to know".

      Oh, and they forgot mentioning that people that don't watch enough cable television or do not remember the last time the underpants of paris hilton where in the news are most probably suspicious.

      From the point of view of someone outside the US I am a bit worried that the plans of the US government to turn the US into a second world country might shrink the amount of rich clientele in the US that until now formed a nice export market for the superior technological products that are developed and produced in the rest of the world.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    20. Re:Paranoid by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      Ok, I just read the piece on new mail laws in germany in the making: it seems we are all in the same boat people, could luck and let's hope for the better! You could try voting differently next time, but it's hard to find a politician that is not paranoid nowadays.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    21. Re:Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please.. please.. pleaseee!! Take me out of the lab. I'm about to cheer the FBI if they can convince my adviser that I don't have to be here every day, every time. And I'd gladly agree that Chinese students won't make me feel guilty again for not being in the lab!.

      Joke aside, I was really pissed off, when a public safety official at my university (I'm a foreign grad student at a US univerisity), stopped me and a group of friends when we were chatting in front of one of the university buildings (my college), when I was about to pick up my stuff from the lab. They were asking if I was student, the asked for my ID, when I told them I was coming to pick up my stuff, the asked me were "my stuff was", and several non comfortable questions.
      That, makes you feel like a suspect of terrorism or a thief. It's really annoying and abusive on their side. I know that might help to keep the campus safe, but it's, trust me, really annoying!

    22. Re:Paranoid by Gorshkov · · Score: 1

      Aldrich Ames comes to mind. He operated for at least 9 years as a foreign spy right under the noses of the CIA. I don't know what brought him down, but I doubt it was someone noticing he worked late hours
      One of the things that brought Ames to the notice of investigators was that he was living much better than he *should* have been able to given his salary. Or, in other words .... "unexplained affluence".

      And it's not like we haven't had a large set of high level officials that've been busted for espionage after years spent doing it
      Just because they don't develop a stamp in the middle of their forehead that says "SPY" in big, bold letters the first time they do something doesn't mean that these behaviors can't be good indicators.

      And even the FBI says that that's all they are - indicators. They're not proof.
    23. Re:Paranoid by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      Or, in other words .... "unexplained affluence".

      That's the only one that makes any sense. The rest are really just "you're a non-conformist, let's chase you down". Which sounds more like biases within the goverment/military than anything that's actually useful.

      I notice you can't actually point to anything credible. Basically, why should I believe the FBI that these are anything but normal behavior? We KNOW that non-spies do ALL these things, and it's not like there's no potential for harm here in false positives. Discouraging people from working late hours, or having an interest outside the narrow parameters of work is bad thing. Do we really need more robots that do as they're told and don't go anywhere outside the norm?

      --
      AccountKiller
    24. Re:Paranoid by Raideen · · Score: 1

      If long and/or irregular work hours are the norm in academia, then what's unusual? Someone who sticks to a tight schedule? Do terrorists have terrorism classes to attend on a regular basis? If a person always leaves the lab when someone else comes in or if he always comes in 5 minutes after the last person leaves, then it's the behavior that's unusual--not the work hours.

    25. Re:Paranoid by Gorshkov · · Score: 1
      normal behaviour depends on context .... and context IS everything.

      When you're working on a classified project, and your neighbour says "Hey, john - how's work?" you say "fine", and you don't worry about it.
      But when the neighbour says "Hey, john - I was wondering. I know you work at XXXX, and I got to wondering .... what can you tell me about YYYY, and is it true that ZZZZ?" you start to pay a bit more attention to your neighour. Yes, it may still be innocent - but as it gets away from banal generalities about your work, or who you work with, or exactly what you DO do, you have to be more careful. If you work in high-energy particle physics, and John happens to be a line cook at a greasy spoon who also just happens to have a life-line interest in the exact things you work with, you have to wonder.

      Most people are interested in computers, and will talk to you about them if they know you're a programmer, for example. But if you go to a party and some guy who works with an accounting firm in collections tries to pick your brain a specific class of heuristic algorithms that you just happen to be working on for DOD, you can be pretty damned sure that it's not casual party conversation. THAT'S the type of "curiosity" they're talking about.

      The things that were listed ARE indicators to be carefull, and that the person you're talking to may not be exactly who they claim to be, IF YOU ARE INVOLVED IN CLASSIFIED PROJECTS, working for DOD or other sensitive government departments. These types of things are NOT normal in the workplace - people really *aren't* interested in exactly what you have on your desk before you at work, and it IS a sign.

      IN academia, it's different. The same principles apply; but because many of these indicators *are* normal behaviours (to a large extent) in academia, they don't transfer well, or obviously.

      I don't see a plot here to suppress or control people at the universities. What I see is a bunch of people who are used to one environment trying to transfer their knowledge to another environment, and because they're not familiar with it, they're screwing up.

      Unreported contact with foreign nationals ... if you have a security clearance, you are *required* to report all contacts with foreign nationals (depending on the country, the relative level of your clearance, etc).

      Well, guess what - it works in industry. It does NOT work in university where 35% of the student population, and 50% of the faculty comes from somewhere else in the world.

      The rest are really just "you're a non-conformist, let's chase you down".
      Again, context and understanding - neither of which came through in TFA.
      If somebody goes on vacation to a different resort every year, there is nothing to worry about. But if somebody who has never taken vacations all of a sudden starts going on vacation 4 times a year, it can be an indication of something. It's the CHANGE in habits and behavior that is more important than the behavior itself in most cases. And it's not a matter of "He's different - let's chase him down". It's a matter of "He's acting differently than he usually does - could there be something here we should know about?" So they check the guy out. They find out his uncle died and left him a time-share in St Lucia, and $250,000 in stocks. All of a sudden his foreign travel and new car aren't an issue - they've been explained.

      But if he hasn't won the lottery, nobody's died, and instead of going to St Lucia he's traipsing off to Quatar, Afganistan, Cuba via Toronto or Mexico City, etc, then don't you think there's a pretty good chance that something IS going on?

      That's why things like that are called indicators, and not proof. It's a reason to look at the situation and make sure that everything IS kosher - nothing more, nothing less. And neither the FBI nor any other agency in the western world concerned with security considers it anything but that.
    26. Re:Paranoid by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      If a project is special, then classify it. That's why we have classification in the first place. Deciding to not classify a project and then forcing people to do a half-assed job of treating it like it is classified is a recipe for complete disclosure. If you act all squirrelly about something, you are going to attract attention more attention then if you just ignored it.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    27. Re:Paranoid by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Not fuck what up? Taking a report from someone at a university who finds a set of traits and activities of a particular person suspicious and then following up said report with an investigation of the circumstances behind the "suspicious" information? "Hey, why did you work late in the lab last week?" "I had to get some work done." "Really?" "Yeah." "Okay, thanks. Good luck with the project!"

      That's optimistic. The procedure would probably be more like: Place them under surveillance at home and at work. Perhaps arrest the person. Perhaps slap them around a bit. If they are Arab, perhaps go a bit "Jack Bauer" on them, or have them "disappeared" to Egypt or Syria for interrogation.

      What makes you think they would be so nice? What makes you think they would never go after an innocent person?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    28. Re:Paranoid by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I challenge you to tell me what working hours would be distinctly unusual in academia. that's probably far easier than you'd imagine, it would be his peers who'd know best. If the hours work track sticky periods in a project every thing is probably hunkey-dorey; if the whole lab heads down to the pub to cellibrate the break-through at 3 pm, except guy who stays at work until 10 pm (the same guy who used to leave at 3 when everybody else left at 10) you might have a problem.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    29. Re:Paranoid by Babbster · · Score: 1

      What makes you think they would be so nice? What makes you think they would never go after an innocent person?

      Probably because I don't accept the myth that the FBI is a collection of mindless automatons running around putting innocent people in jail for the entertainment of their bosses. Probably because I think that FBI agents are, in the main, otherwise normal Americans who got into federal law enforcement to help their country and not to play out some fascist power fantasy. Probably because I think that even if the FBI was full to the gills with people who want to take away their fellow citizens' freedoms, they still wouldn't want to waste their counterintelligence resources on people who they can quickly and easily determine are not foreign agents.

      PS- Using the word "never" indicates a childishness that never ceases to sadden me. Yes, innocent people can end up the targets of investigations, but said innocence is far more commonly discovered and acknowledged than it is punished.

      PPS- You need to watch less TV, or at least figure out the difference between fiction and non-fiction.
    30. Re:Paranoid by ioshhdflwuegfh · · Score: 1

      Federal agents are visiting some of the New England's top universities... to warn university heads about the dangers of foreign spies and terrorists stealing sensitive academic research. I wonder what would those be?
    31. Re:Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, you are about the most loathsome person posting on Slashdot.

    32. Re:Paranoid by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Probably because I don't accept the myth that the FBI is a collection of mindless automatons running around putting innocent people in jail for the entertainment of their bosses.

      If that's true, then why aren't the FBI speaking out against their bosses? Because this government obviously wants to torture people and lock up those with different political opinions. Anyone who is not a mindless automaton would not continue to work for this government.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  5. One notch at a time by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's how you tighten the cuffs.

    --
    Deleted
  6. Serious? by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unexplained affluence

    Ummmm, that is what an education is supposed to get you.

    failing to report overseas travel

    Oh, my students are supposed to check in with me everywhere they go?

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope

    Hey! I want my students to explore new and interesting things. That is what they are here to do.

    keeping unusual work hours

    They had *better* be working their asses off. :-)

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals

    Ummmm, collaboration? There are folks outside the US that *are* doing exciting science you know...

    unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials

    OK, I might give them this.

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know

    Oh, jeez..... these people have been in government too long. Compartmentalized information is certainly appropriate, but in an educational setting, where people are not doing sensitive work? Come on now, if you are involved in classified work, you have to pass background checks and *obtain* clearance, particularly for compartmentalized projects.

    and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.

    Sure, whatever. They might also be skiing...

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Serious? by melikamp · · Score: 1

      Mod this up, please. I work in a University and writing a post like this one was my first thought too.

      attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know is just cracking me up... People who wrote this probably think that scientific research is a process most resembling folding a stack of envelopes.

    2. Re:Serious? by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I must be an espionage risk then.

      I've had a great deal of contact with foreign nationals.
      I have pursued a lot of information outside of the scope of my job (in fact, I'm often called in on projects that have nothing to do with my profession because of my weird set of experience).
      I've been known to keep some truly bizare hours.
      And, truth be known, I've probably had some contact with foreign gov, mil, or intel officials in the past because of the rather strange set of friends that I've had (some of which had influential families from other countries, and at least one of them had a father who worked for an embassy).

      In addition, to be quite honest, I don't feel the need to explain ANY of it to anyone who flashes a government ID at me.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    3. Re:Serious? by ghoti · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more.

      unreported contacts with foreign nationals
      Heck, I am a foreign national. Am I supposed to turn in all my students now?

      unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials
      How am I supposed to know that? Same as with travel to those evil foreign countries, they're not going to tell me that. Or if they tell me, how do I know it's "unreported" (to whom, anyway?)?

      If this is for real, it's McCarthy-style stupidity all over again. And you'd think that wasn't that long ago that people wouldn't remember.

      --
      EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
    4. Re:Serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials

      OK, I might give them this


      Right, so who do I report to before I visit my embassy to renew my passport, proxy vote, ask for information required by banks/employers/the IRS ? Oh yea, sorry, I guess these rules only apply to US citizens. After all, those of us recruited from abroad might just go home when we decide enough is enough. I'm sure that will be good for the development of American science. Because of bullshit like this those of us going overseas for our careers tend to look a little further north. Hey, they respect my right to marry as well...
    5. Re:Serious? by cgenman · · Score: 1

      unexplained absences are considered potential espionage indicators.

      Wow. I am a dangerous man.

    6. Re:Serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah but from your faq you worked for the CIA

    7. Re:Serious? by zenyu · · Score: 1

      Except for the military and intelligence portion of this one:
      unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials

      All these indicators describe any decent graduate student. If they have family that happen to work for the military or intelligence branches of their home governments then this one would be pretty typical as well. The year I entered my Ph.D program there was not one student who didn't hold a foreign passport. We should just put a fence up around the whole country and declare it a prison, no one should leave and visitor entry would be strictly controlled, that would be more sane than this FBI scheme.

      America: Land of the slaves, home of scared.

    8. Re:Serious? by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

      In addition, to be quite honest, I don't feel the need to explain ANY of it to anyone who flashes a government ID at me.
      Yeah, and I'm sure that will seem just great when you're in a secret detention facility somewhere.

      Americans voted for Fascists, and now they act all surprised that they have a Fascist government. It's hard to believe that Americans could be so terrified of a few welfare programs (or even that most horrifying of all prospets -- voting outside the two-party system), that they would elect a bunch of guys whose platform included a war, enormous increases in the size of the government, massive national debt, and the razing of the economy.

    9. Re:Serious? by Idbar · · Score: 1

      People who wrote this probably think that scientific research is a process most resembling folding a stack of envelopes.

      It seems you are forgetting they work for the government. Perhaps that's all they do besides bothering anyone else.

    10. Re:Serious? by IPExcellence · · Score: 1

      and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.
      Sure, whatever. They might also be skiing... "I don't feel like teaching today" usually meant golf in one class I took :) Hmmm, will they extend these rules to the links?
    11. Re:Serious? by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      unreported contacts with foreign nationals Jees, I better stay out of the math department at OSU! Just walking into the TA's offices might get you on a list...
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    12. Re:Serious? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      keeping unusual work hours

      When I was a college student, my work hours were so unusual that I probably would have ended up in Guantanamo.

      And as far as "unreported contact with foreign nationals", I remember a trip to Europe my junior year when I not only had unreported contact, but unprotected contact as well.

      These are the opening salvos in the terror-scare stories we're going to start hearing running up to 2008. If you think you heard a lot of scaremongering during the 2004 and 2006 elections, you haven't heard anything yet. In fact, I'm guessing there are groups of clean-cut young men in Salt Lake City with white shirts, black pants and ties named Brad or Curt who are learning to take off but not land.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re:Serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they just want you to use some common sense. If you have a student on a student visa who just stops showing up for instance, there might be a problem. No one wants you to be a Gestapo agent, but if you see something fishy in these areas, don't ignore it.

  7. great, i'm going to get into trouble... by Digitus1337 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "...showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope..." A true thirst for knowledge will arrouse suspicion? Do we really want this? Controlling information is the first step down a nasty road.

    1. Re:great, i'm going to get into trouble... by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

      "...showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope..." A true thirst for knowledge will arrouse suspicion? Do we really want this? Controlling information is the first step down a nasty road.
      I dunno. Where I come from an unusual interest in information outside the job scope is called a hobby. Such as taking mamba classes, attending museums, going to wine tastings, watching live performances, playing sports, becoming an amateur astronomer, visiting historical monuments, going to UFO conventions, etc.

      i.e. an interest in culture.
      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    2. Re:great, i'm going to get into trouble... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope..." A true thirst for knowledge will arrouse suspicion? Do we really want this? Controlling information is the first step down a nasty road.

      This sounds more like a step farther down that nasty road. The first step has already been taken.

      In regards to the summary:
      It sounds like an attempt at tracking and removing hackers. Not only computer hackers, but any type of hacker. Whether they be a hardware, software, electrical, mind or any other type hacker. Basically, anyone who helped our Country (and the world) to its current state of technology.

      Our Country will not be around much longer if they keep stifling an individuals interest in knowledge. Ignorant masses are great to rule over and to send into battle, but ignorant masses are also the downfall of a society. Without hackers of all trades and ideologies a nation will implode upon itself. Nope, our Country will not be around much longer.

      What would have happened in past wars if we only had ignorant masses to throw at our enemy? We would have lost and it would have been quick. Without those strategists of which many are hackers, then war is lost, and a way of life is lost.

    3. Re:great, i'm going to get into trouble... by westlake · · Score: 1
      showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope..." A true thirst for knowledge will arrouse suspicion?

      No.

      But if you are working with anthrax you might legitmatly be asked why the sudden interest in weaponizing the disease? In acquiring the necessary technical documents, etc.

      Particularly if that aspect of the problem is - far - outside the scope of your own research.

    4. Re:great, i'm going to get into trouble... by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 1

      If there's a foreign national is working with anthrax at a US college, then he's probably already been checked out...oh, wait: he's been "checked out" by the ultra-competent US government, which means that he'll be sent a renewed visa six months after his anthrax attack kills 100 people. Somehow I think that informing the FBI that some student is working odd hours or wants to know more is gonna matter as much as if I'd reported Muhammed Attah to them for just wanting to know how to fly a plane but not land one.

      Seriously, though, do we let foreign nationals work with things like anthrax in this country without *some* kind of background check?

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    5. Re:great, i'm going to get into trouble... by westlake · · Score: 1
      If there's a foreign national is working with anthrax at a US college

      What makes you think it has be a "foreign national?" The Birmingham church bombing in 1963, Oklahoma City in 1995, The Atlanta OLympic Park bombing in 1996. All home-grown acts of terrorism.

  8. Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by pcgamez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    [quote]
    Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.
    [/quote]

    Other than the first point, that describes a large portion of the college population (especially at the graduate level).

    The problem with a guide like this is that it returns too many false positives. The odds of a single person who fit most of those characteristics out of a group of 20,000 being a terrorist is almost nil. Yes, it will be true in some cases, but not in enough to warrant the massive investment in time. All this does it put people's minds at ease that the government is Doing Something.

    1. Re:Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by Elemenope · · Score: 1

      I especially got a kick out of "keeping unusual work hours". Seriously, who *doesn't* do this at a University?

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    2. Re:Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by turgid · · Score: 1

      The problem with a guide like this is that it returns too many false positives. The odds of a single person who fit most of those characteristics out of a group of 20,000 being a terrorist is almost nil.

      ...but... it makes lots of jobs for government people to do. Tony Blair's lot are at it as well.

    3. Re:Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by Draek · · Score: 1

      All this does it put people's minds at ease that the government is Doing Something. at the risk of sounding paranoid, it also puts "Big Brother is watching YOU" inside students' minds which, whether it's a 'design goal' or just an 'unexpected feature' of this program, is much scarier and damaging to society at large, IMHO.
      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    4. Re:Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      The problem with a guide like this is that it returns too many false positives.

      What do you mean "problem"? - J Edgar Hoover

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:Oh crap, i'm a terrorist/spy! by SoulRider · · Score: 1

      All this does it put people's minds at ease that the government is Doing Something.

      Well, thats about 90% of what our politicians do these days, just try and convince us they are doing something.

  9. Come on by chuckymonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OHHHHH NOOOEEESSS! Teh trrists r in ur skools stealin ur secrets! Seriously though, when does it end? At what point do we say enough is enough with this fearmongering?

    --
    "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    1. Re:Come on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When education is abolished, and you can all be just like the Taliban. One set of uneducated warriors against another set of uneducated warriors; it's the only way to wage war. Fight fire with fire and all that. He with the most uneducated warriors will "win" (not really, but let's pretend)

    2. Re:Come on by hebertrich · · Score: 1

      At what point do we say enough is enough with this fearmongering?

      errr .. when you'll be tired of it ? :D

  10. Those damn kids won't get off my lawn! by Smight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Looks to me like 99% of all college students meet quite a few of their espionage indicators.

    Here's an idea. How about not passing laws that further disillusion Americans into becoming terrorists?
    This is like lowering the speed limit to try and stop drag racing.

    --
    IOU one (1) signature
    1. Re:Those damn kids won't get off my lawn! by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is like lowering the speed limit to try and stop drag racing.

      I know what you mean. It's not like people will stop drag racing. They'll just be doing it slower.

  11. Blog article seems confused by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The DIA guidelines on "combating the insider threat" refer to people with security clearances of at least SECRET. That's a standard list, and goes back to at least the 1950s. The article doesn't make a connection with it being applied to universities.

    What's puzzling about this is that it's totally out of touch with reality. The USSR was interested in American R&D, but that's because they had an industrial base and weapons plants that could use R&D. No enemy of the US today has anything like that. (North Korea and Iran, maybe, but they're mostly trying to do things the superpowers did in the 1950s.) Al-Queda consists of loosely affiliated small groups that use off the shelf weaponry. This seems a mis-aimed effort, which isn't unusual for the current administration.

    1. Re:Blog article seems confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're making two common mistakes: thinking that today's enemies are tomorrow's enemies, and that only our enemies spy/steal from us.

      As for the article at hand, this is just an over-reaction. The FBI's just making educational institutions aware that they may be targeted for espionage, and what to look for. This knee-jerk "ZOMG! The MAN is oppressing me!" reaction is really stupid.

    2. Re:Blog article seems confused by furball · · Score: 1

      No enemy of the US today has anything like that.


      China.
    3. Re:Blog article seems confused by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Or how about Russia? Or have people not noticed how much that country's government has regressed in the past several years? I don't remember what TV show I was watching - probably some dumb conspiracy-related thing - but this [para]phrase stuck in my head: "You think the Cold War's over? It's only halftime."

    4. Re:Blog article seems confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The above entry is both correct and incorrect.

      It is correct in that the dreaded "guidelines" are written to be read from the perspective of a researcher or a contractor holding a SECRET or higher clearance, and have been in place for decades. I know this because I am such a contractor and have been regularly briefed by my employer, who are in turn briefed by the government through various agencies, on both those general topics and more specific topics and situations as they arrive. (I'm nowhere near important enough to know about or worry about the specific cases.) I have seen, in my career, several fishing attempts both blatant and subtle, ranging from domestic salesmen who just wanted to get a leg up on the competition to a charming incident where a co-worker received some unannounced, unsought letters from a researcher no one had ever heard from. Postmarked (physical letter, mind you) from Cuba. (This was a long time ago, when Cuba was a little more of a concern.)

      It is incorrect in that industrial espionage is most certainly an ongoing concern. The articles very correctly point out that the non-classified research is likely to be the weak link in the chain of security at universities because university workers assisting in classified research are themselves briefed already on what to do and how to conduct themselves. Purely civilian researchers are not. And contrary to naive opinion, a great many university officials will at the very least strongly consider what the FBI has to say because many universities have extensive ties to the industrial community and reap large financial rewards from patent revenues, which are threatened directly by industrial espionage targeted toward the university link. As well, in the same way that university researchers working on classified material may be trusted with government-sensitive information, those same workers in an industrial partnership may be trusted with corporate-sensitive information which would very much be a target for industrial espionage. Those same university officials will also-- quite rightly consider whether or not the FBI offer will do them more harm than good, and will probably work with the FBI to come up with something that is both palatable and useful.

      The only dubious part of the information is the mild emphasis on terrorism. I can think of a few examples where there is information floating around university labs that would be of use to terrorists, but I'd think the risk there is, honestly, pretty damn low. On the other hand, putting the word in the article raises its profile, if only by getting a bunch of uninformed slashdotters to make a big fuss and wring their hands over very little.

    5. Re:Blog article seems confused by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      What's puzzling about this is that it's totally out of touch with reality. The USSR was interested in American R&D, but that's because they had an industrial base and weapons plants that could use R&D. No enemy of the US today has anything like that.

      Except tha a lot of espionage is done by our friends; whether it be against government agencies (such as Israel in the Pollard case) or private companises (such as the French do as explained by a retired head of one of their intelligence services -

      'This espionage activity is an essential way for France to keep abreast of international commerce
      and technology. Of course, it was directed against the United States as well as others. You must
      remember that while we are allies in defense matters, we are also economic competitors in the
      world.'" (Reference - http://www.hanford.gov/oci/maindocs/ci_r_docs/fren chesp.pdf)

      Like it or not there are many countries that spy on us.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    6. Re:Blog article seems confused by zzcat · · Score: 1

      This has little or nothing to do with paranoia about terrorists; it's about (not completely unfounded) concern about espionage by foreign companies and governments. While it is chilling, given the current US administration's unremitting assault on rights and freedoms, please note that it does seem to be aimed exclusively at students in science and technology working on sensitive projects that require some kind of security clearance to begin with. I must say I don't really get the keeping late hours bit, though. Based on that single criterion, they would have to declare every graduate student in the country an enemy combatant. Gitmo would be quickly overrun by chain-smoking, angst-ridden comparative literature majors.

    7. Re:Blog article seems confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that they said "unusual hours". You should be suspicious of a graduate student who comes in at 6 am instead of going home at 6 am ;-)

    8. Re:Blog article seems confused by florescent_beige · · Score: 1

      Where do you get that information? Because the preamble to the ncix doc says it is aimed at "the widely diverse group of readers who visit the NCIX Web site", not those with clearances of any kind. And agent Bamford himself said his emphasis was on non-classified information.

      It's not clear to me where pressesc gets the information that connects the DIA doc to Bamford's overture to the universities.

      But most importantly, it seems to me people in intelligence are so worried they will be made to look bad by the next terrorist incident, they are doing absolutely everything they can think of as a CYA sort of approach. It doesn't look very professional.
      --
      Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
    9. Re:Blog article seems confused by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Dude the French think we're spying on them with American made crackberry's, what do you suppose they're doing to us? Everybody is crawling up somebodies ass with a microscope, it's the information age!

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  12. Deceptive headline designed to distort the truth by mc6809e · · Score: 4, Insightful


    There is nothing in that article the describes the restriction of students' freedoms.

    Instead, the FBI is advising these universities on how they can protect themselves from those that would steal important research.

    As bad as the government might be, I don't see what good it does to distort the facts.

  13. unusual work hours? by Knytefall · · Score: 1

    at my university, the lights are always on because GRAD STUDENTS DON'T SLEEP. my office has a hammock!

    looks like they'll be locking us all up. good thing: now i can sleep!

    1. Re:unusual work hours? by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      I loved the phone call I made from a computer lab to the local pizza place at like 1:30 or 2am ordering several pizzas.

      We got to the point where he asked where I wanted it delivered, and I told him. I was promptly told that academic buildings weren't open at that time and that this had to be a prank call just before he hung up.

      I called back and asked to talk to the manager. Out of an amusing quirk of fate, the manager there was normally on days and knew me because the Center that I worked for ordered lunch from there all of the time and we tipped well, so the manager knew me.

      I recognized the manager's voice and explained what was going on. Half an hour later, the guy who answered the phone showed up with our pizzas, an apology for being a jerk (which he was), and several 2-liters of soda to make up for what happened.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  14. Third Red Scare.... by PorkNutz · · Score: 1, Interesting
    ...except this time it's brown.

    Sounds like McCarthyism all over again.

    -----
    Police State T-Shirt
    Funny Shirts @ ProStoner.com

    1. Re:Third Red Scare.... by PorkNutz · · Score: 1
      Wow, Troll eh? How is that trolling exactly?

      -----
      Police State T-Shirt
      Funny Shirts @ ProStoner.com

    2. Re:Third Red Scare.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps people don't like seeing your goddamned spam?

  15. First This by bsytko · · Score: 0, Troll

    Next week it its immigrants, extremists, hippies, and pretty much anyone who they deem a "threat." All I see here is an attempt by the FBI to make Americans scared of fellow Americans. Pretty soon we'll be turning each other in for doing mundane tasks soon seen as "crimes." Naturally I feel this is a bit extreme, but I could see it going this far, someday.

    1. Re:First This by damian+cosmas · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that this is targeted at foreigners, not "Fellow Americans."

  16. You don't NEED to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me tell you one thing you Fucking Bunch of Idiots.

    "attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know". People need to know everything. Curiosity is one of human kind's best advantage. Reason your job exists is mostly due to curiosity. Good Things(tm) are created because of curiosity. Universities are for people that "need to know". Who the hell is going to estimate the "need to know" ratio for a student ? How many students will avoid going "out of his field" because he's scared being anal probed by FBI ?

  17. DoS attack by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    This is why everyone should switch to a major of Business or English Lit or Basket Weaving. Let 'em reap what they sow. Hasten the demise of the police state by the only means possible -- passive resistance.

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  18. US university : soon to be empty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many of you PhD which stayed at a foreign university can say that you did a few of those too ?
    * Unexplained affluence (up to what point ? For some of us to have meat in the tomatoe sauce and the spaghetti was being rich)
    * failing to report overseas travel (why should it reported to the university ? I never reported my travel , short or long to the uni I was, none of their business while I attend)
    * showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope (curiosity killed the cat. I got my new job because I was interrested in stuff which was not in the scope of my previous job)
    * keeping unusual work hours (at an university ? I am laughing so hard. Those guy never were undergraduate or PhD , for many of us you ONLY have unusual hours...)
    * unreported contacts with foreign nationals (who are my friend are none of your business and certainly not a proof of being an agent, unless I am working at an ultra secret project)
    * unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials (how the hell a university know those are happenning?)
    * attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know (I am not sure what this one means, could be a problem of my lack of good english, but sound similar to above)
    * and unexplained absences (how many of us fall under that one ?)

    My opinion : I did not read TFA but only one (the one in bold) seems to me to be an indicator of being an agent. And it is certainly not one which will be done openly by a real agent. Pure FUD to induce paranoia and ride on the fear.

    1. Re:US university : soon to be empty by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Unexplained affluence (up to what point ? For some of us to have meat in the tomatoe sauce and the spaghetti was being rich)

      Doesn't sound too unreasonable. If someone appears to have several hundred thousand dollars more than you might expect, it's at least worth looking into.

  19. Russia and China... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to name a few.

  20. That sounds more like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Violations of the Vice President rather than students.

  21. I don't see anything out of line here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing here to suggest the hysteria in the summary or blog posting is warranted. All I see is a fairly typical list of indicators and some red flags that are commonly observed in cases of espionage and among people ripe for recruitment for espionage.

    As with all indicators and red flags the mere presence of a couple of them doesn't mean there is a any actual problem. Just something to keep an eye on. But if you start to see more than a few of them then chances are you need to pay serious attention and investigate. Sure too many indicators could all be just innocent coincidence, but then again, they might not be concidence at all.

    It seems about as dangerous as a list of indicators and red flags for individuals who have the potential to become school shooters. And we all know what happens when people miss those indicators. Multiple homicides. Questions like "Why didn't we notice the warning signs?"

  22. Uhhhh... by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

    Perhaps with the exception of frequent meetings with foreign government agents, I think the FBI just described the vast majority of college students.

    1) Unexplained affluence: What trust fund kiddie brags about the money he has coming from his dad?
    2) Failure to report overseas travel: Sex tourism is a big industry, mang.
    3) Interest outside job scope: They're called hobbies, guys.
    4) Unusual work hours: We're fucking students. We go to class during the day. We work for our beer money when we can.
    5) Unexplained absences? Yeah, regular attendance has always been a hallmark of the average college student. Three letters: T, H, and C.

    I hate you, FBI.

  23. Comp Sci Majors? by annihilizard · · Score: 0

    Won't half of these makes most computer science majors suspected terrorists? I mean seriously.. "odd work hours", "Unexplained affluence" (moonlighting, anybody?), "showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope", "attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know" (these two are the hacker's MO)

  24. People, the FBI is briefing faculties.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not enforcing "Restrictions". These are educational sessions.

    Sheesh, these presenatations are common. You work with a defense contractor, you sit through them. And they are not "1 strike you're out" deals, but common indicators you look for, which together may paint a picture.

    Unusual Work hours? They mean UNUSUAL for research hours. Sure people work in the lab late. But does JOE seem to always work later than everyone else? Is he working late outside the scope of a active research project that may require cruch time?

    Unreported travel? Again, he comes back from a week's vacation in China, and no one new where he was going. Regular travel, most everyone blabs about what they did and visited. Does JOE seem uptight about his trip.

    Sudden Affluence. Grad students are paid a pittance. If Joe is living in a High End condo and he doesn't have a rich family supporting him, that's a VALID concern.

    Showing interest in other projects. Again, scientists share ideas, and they sit and chat and chew the fat. But there is a difference between idle chit-chat, discussions, and someone always trying to pick your brain about 'X', especially if X is classified.

    These kind of security presentations have gone on for YEARS, even at Universities ( especially those doing nuclear research ).

  25. Mod parent up by Dachannien · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    This is socialist anti-American misinformational FUD, pure and simple. The blog article even admits as much by linking to the World Socialist Web Site.

    Just remember, folks: the bullshit flows freely from both sides, not just from the Bush Administration.

    1. Re:Mod parent up by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Just remember, folks: the bullshit flows freely from both sides, not just from the Bush Administration."

      But since Bush and his cronies are evil, and those opposing him are good, the means are irrelevant.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:Mod parent up by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      And it even flows freely from those who admits it flows freely from both sides. If you have to attack something by calling it socialist or anti-American, you're admitting you can barely call it misinformational, and that there are other things that are socialist and anti-American but not misinformational which you want to quietly quash so that you don't have to deal with it logically.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  26. Spy vs. Spy by jd · · Score: 1, Interesting
    keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences

    So everyone who plays WoW (unusual work hours, to catch up), plays MUDs or goes on IRC (unreported contacts with foreign nationals), provides an EU government with Linux tech support (unreported contact with foreign government), applies patches to SELinux from the NSA's counterparts elsewhere (military, or intelligence officials), wants a Classical Education or wants to learn additional subjects out of enjoyment, interest or geekiness (attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know), or goes to play pinball at the student union hall instead of attending class (unexplained absences) is a spy?

    That makes 99.9% of all student population spies, and a good 75% of all lecturers. When will the DoD launch a bombing campaign on Skull and Bones secret meetings? Oh, they can't - they all belong.

    --
    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)
    1. Re:Spy vs. Spy by thrawn_aj · · Score: 1
      Wish I had mod points left. Parent is a troll? WTH??? For pointing out the obvious that TFA failed to realize? Let me add another to his/her list:

      "showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope": otherwise known in popular culture as "thinking outside the box" and "researching unusual solutions to problems". :P

      Also, "keeping unusual hours" is what distinguishes university folk from common people who do grunt work - the nine-to-fivers. I guess the FBI itself should be put under surveillance if their members suddenly start showing NON-zombie-like behavior.

      I agree that special precautions should be taken when considering a National Lab associated with a university, but the University itself will be a source of several thousand false positives if these are the (rather pathetic) indicators they can come up with.

  27. McCarthyism all over again. by ErichTheRed · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Replace "terrorist" with "communist" and it's 1950 all over again.

    I almost wish we had the Cold War back. At least the enemy was clearly defined and kept 100% of the government's attention. Now that there's no clear enemy, we feel the need to go after everything.

    And with the Cold War, at least there was a permanent stalemate on both sides...neither side would even think about launching an attack because they'd get wiped out in the process. Tense, but it kept people at bay.

    1. Re:McCarthyism all over again. by selex · · Score: 1

      Mr. McCarthy will you please stop with the knock-knock jokes! Sincerely, Lyndon LaRouche

    2. Re:McCarthyism all over again. by ediron2 · · Score: 1

      Except for that part about Unexplained Affluence. Not so common among Communists.

      And how can the FBI (let alone some nitwit college Dean of Students) define odd work hours, interest in stuff outside of their area of work, and untracked time overseas when dealing with *COLLEGE STUDENTS*?! That seems to implicate Cramming, liberal arts degrees or changing majors, semesters abroad or trips home (since, I assume, we're going to pay particularly close attention to foreign nationals, even if we say otherwise) and so much else.

  28. Read TFA by Lambticc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the guidelines:

    We should report observations of one or more of the following indicators pertaining to a person with access to classified information...

    This seems to make perfect sense. If schools want the money that comes from doing classified research they should be vigilant in making sure that that research stays classified.
    1. Re:Read TFA by MonGuSE · · Score: 0, Troll

      Since the government has been retroactively classifying information that they deem sensitive for the last 6 years, one mans classified information is another mans senior thesis. People say nano tech is the future but what could an evil person do with nano tech, or chemistry knowledge, or robotics, or pesticide research, or GM plants, virologists, and even computer scientists now. For instance you have to have a license to buy glass beakers because people might use them to make drugs. You have to have a license to buy propellant for model rocketry because you might use it to blow something up. The list goes on and now they are talking about making common tools in an IT techs arsenal illegal because they could be used for illegal means. As taxes continue to increase the government continues to grow and continues its dominance as the largest funding source for purely scientific research. Also since we the public pay for the research it should be by default non governmental and non secret unless it would lead directly to death and destruction. Imagine someone sticks down a servo controlled pistol in the middle of a busy pedestrian space walks away and starts taking people out or any other number of things. Now is robotics strictly controlled because it could be used to aid in the death of people? I mean come on anything could lead to anything it just depends on what it is going to be used for and the only people you inconvenience with these rules is law abiding people.

    2. Re:Read TFA by jrsjrsjrs · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Also, consider industrial espionage may be the real concern. -- Terrorism is a tiny subset of national security.

    3. Re:Read TFA by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 1

      So there are foreign nationals that have access to classified information, then? WTF is up with that? Last time I worked with anything classified it had NOFORN (NO access by FORiegn Nationals or some such) plastered all over it. If it's so damned precious why are they even allowed to work on it to start with?

      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    4. Re:Read TFA by homer_ca · · Score: 1
      Actually, the GP post misquotes TFA. The article links to a PDF of a standard counter-intelligence briefing intended for people with classified access. University officials may have been given this briefing, but you can't apply it verbatim to university students. Here's a reader comment from TFA that explains it:

      It looks like this document is totally being taken out of context. This is a dull and standard boilerplate document about how to watch for people who have security clearances but might be selling secrets to the enemy.

      For example, people with certain security clearances may be required to report all foreign travel. They also are required to report any sudden changes in their financial situation. So indicators like "unreported foreign travel" and "unexplained affluence" don't make any sense for the vast majority of folks who are not required to report or explain these things in the first place.
  29. Rules within DoD and overseas travel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to follow those rules as a person with a US Security Clearance. I did an overseas trip to NZ last Christmas and I had to get briefings and fill out paperwork on where I am going to, what flights. When I get back, all they are concerned with is people who contacted you inquiring on DoD related items.

    When I took the trip, I left any item related to my work well enough behind and I look young enough to pass by as an older college student in the way I dress, etc. I mentioned about taking classes at the local university which was true but only one class.

  30. Monitoring does not violate freedoms by Andrew+Tanenbaum · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You can still do exactly what you were doing before. You don't need permission to do those things, but this article says that people should be taking note of them because they're suspicious activities. Lacking privacy != Taking away your ability to do things.

  31. Slashdot by Melugo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Has anyone else ever noticed that slashdot (which is mostly american) invariably notices and complains when the US authorities are out of line? Why aren't there any stupid yanks on slashdot? Maybe only /.ers should get a vote, it would solve a lot of problems :P

    1. Re:Slashdot by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      There are stupid Americans(you seriously need to find a better term than "Yank" though, considering that it's pretty much equivalent to me calling anybody from the British Isles "English") on Slashdot, and quite a few of them are on my foe list so I can see them and know that a nutcase is ahead.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  32. A solution by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 1

    Here is a simple way we can solve this issue -

    How about the government stop giving money to universities that do any research that has any possible application to weapons/energy/advanced materials/particle physics - they can give the money to defense contractors and while it will cost more money than student slave labor we can all rest easy at night knowing that we will be safe - of course the professors that teach these subjects will either have to find new things to work on unrelated to the areas above or go to work for said defense contractors (assuming they are US citizens who can get a security clearance) or they can start working for other governments - with no students doing any relevant research that will get them a job with said defense contractor my job will be safe for years to come !! I am sure the FBI would go along with this plan !!

  33. This is how it begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next stop, East Germany!

  34. Stupid Company, Dumber School. by twitter · · Score: 0, Troll

    Actually, it's neither paranoid or counterproductive .... if you're working for a defense contractor, the government, or the military directly.

    Any company that discourages curiosity and hard work will end up with stupid and lazy employees, the kind that would think those kinds of rules should be applied to Universities .... oh shit. Scratch that, there's nothing stupid or lazy about the FBI, I swear, I didn't mean it. Please don't put me on a no fly, no work, no rent, no life list.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Stupid Company, Dumber School. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no fly, no work, no rent, no life list You've posted on average about 4 times a day on this site since you registered, and I reckon at least three-quarters of them were shit-filled lie-fests about things that you don't know anything about.

      You're already on the last list by default.
  35. citizens responsibility does anyone know what is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article is poorly done, but it sounds like the FBI is asking people to be on the look out for things that are out of the norm. Perhaps, its too big a job for them to do it on their own so they are asking for help. And we should help protect the USA and its ideals. In truth, as laid out by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United State, its the peoples responsibility to help protect freedoms, right to pursue happiness, extra once we/someone see these rights have been or are being taken away from a person, a group, whatever. The US citizen is supposed to stand up and take action. However, we do have agencies that try to help but they can not be everywhere and watching everything so having people educated in knowing what to look for might go a long way to protecting the USA. At lest, I hope this is what they, FBI, are doing. Its a little unclear given the way the article is written. Its a shame how poorly we, the USA, pass correct information onto other people so they can be properly informed.

  36. A small addition to the primer by adeydas9 · · Score: 1

    A small addition to the primer:

    No chatting with chicks or family abroad, no slashdotting on foreign related articles and no addmittance to foreign hotels without notifing the FBI.

  37. people ARE doing sensitive work by r00t · · Score: 1
    Oh, jeez..... these people have been in government too long. Compartmentalized information is certainly appropriate, but in an educational setting, where people are not doing sensitive work? Come on now, if you are involved in classified work, you have to pass background checks and *obtain* clearance, particularly for compartmentalized projects.


    Lots of classified stuff is done at universities. Lots more stuff which ought to be classified is done there as well.

    It's everything from actual weapons-related stuff to things which we'd not like to have sucked up by some economic espionage program.

    1. Re:people ARE doing sensitive work by BWJones · · Score: 1

      Yes, I *know*. Additionally, there are lots of folks doing that work including foreign nationals. However, anyone involved in such projects are subject to background checks and clearance, even at the Restricted or Confidential level. Secret and Top Secret classifications are also given out to individuals performing work at universities, even clearances to comparmentalized projects and information, but again.... those individuals are more closely monitored and they have to pass extensive background checks at no small cost.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  38. I pity the (university attending) foo' by Tatisimo · · Score: 1
    Who has a Chinese girlfriend and takes a trip to China to meet her parents. (He might be really delivering secrets to the Chinese government)

    Who decides to go south to Mexico for spring break. (He's smuggling drugs, definitely)

    Who simply can't get a job and somehow lands a position delivering pizza at 2:00 am (yes, even Physics students must do that kind of stuff. They might really have a pizza loaded with plans for world domination)

    And the ones who want to expand their knowledge! (An art student interested in high level math, an English student who likes piloting air planes, a biology student who likes to knit... all spies...)

    Wouldn't this beat the whole point of going to college for learning?

    Someday 40 years after this, plenty of documents on this subject will be declassified and the people then will look back and realize how needlessly paranoid the government was back in 2007... Like we do when looking at CIA documents from 40 years ago.

    --
    Give Kashyyyk back to the Wookies
    1. Re:I pity the (university attending) foo' by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 0

      "Someday 40 years after this, plenty of documents on this subject will be declassified and the people then will look back and realize how needlessly paranoid the government was back in 2007... Like we do when looking at CIA documents from 40 years ago."

      Right. Now we know the Soviet Union was simply misunderstood.

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    2. Re:I pity the (university attending) foo' by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      What's funny is that the closest the US government ever got to imitating Stalin is when they were most worried about Communism. (I agree that getting blacklisted is better than being sent to the Gulags but that's like saying getting killed by the guillotine is better than getting killed by an axe)

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  39. Sweet, I was a terrorist. by nick_davison · · Score: 1

    Unexplained affluence, - Do many student jobs pay anything other than cash in hand?

    failing to report overseas travel, - Fortunately, ending up in New Zealand, Russia, The Cannaries, etc. wasn't something that needed to be reported when I was a student.

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, Given how little interest I paid inside the scope of my course, the moment I showed interest in anything, it was unusual. Plus it was pretty common for us to randomly sit in on other lectures that looked interesting.

    keeping unusual work hours, CS major + jolt + projects + MUDs

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals, I married a foreign national I didn't report meeting while at university.

    unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, Should we ignore the university housing me with a guy from the Singapore military?

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, If I had only learned what I'd needed to know, I'd be a lousy employee now. The fact that I learned to do a whole bunch of things outside my course's scope is part of why my career's been vastly more successful than it would otherwise have been.

    and unexplained absences In my day, we called these "lectures." I don't know anyone who a) didn't have plenty of absences and b) explained any of them.

    Clearly, I must have been a terrorist... Or an absolutely normal CS major.

    Mind you, I'm also the grandson of a man who tried to enlist in the British Army during World War II - already being a marksmanship champion - and was told to piss off. He was only allowed to enlist once he had his medical degree and was promptly sent to Kenya. Unable to figure out why, he had a friend in intelligence check his record. It turned out that, back in the 30s, with Communism being the cool new politics with the kids, he and some friends came across Franco's envoy to London and relieved him of both ceremonial sword and pants. Though no charges were ever pressed, it ended up on his file and hence Kenya was the furthest place they could find from the Russians.

    Which all goes to show how utterly silly such indicators tend to be.

    1. Re:Sweet, I was a terrorist. by furball · · Score: 1

      Unexplained affluence, - Do many student jobs pay anything other than cash in hand?


      I'll try to address this because the information that I have is not the information you have. The immediate example that comes to mind are foreign students originating from Vietnam. Many of them are hard working types. They're the standard usual case. There are also a fairly high number that belongs to family with deep ties to the Communist party in Vietnam. They are fairly wealthy. Communists? Wealthy? Apparently you don't understand how governmental corruption works. I'll let that slide.

      These kids are dropping $5-6k/month in living and entertainment expenses on a monthly basis in the US.

      Are the kids spying? I have no idea. However, there are plenty of messages on Vietnamese message board forums of parents in Vietnam asking if $5-6k/month is sufficient for living and entertainment expenses. The Vietnamese parents on this side of the Pacific (not exactly politically friendly with the parents on the opposite side of the Pacific) tell them to jack that amount of up to $20k/month.

      It seems like these recommendations are targeting a very specific population.
  40. typical brain-dead bureaucrats by dltaylor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Obviously, the FBI has a large number of brain-dead bureaucrats that serve no purpose but to create busy-work for others. The FBI needs to have its budget cut severely and get rid of them, reducing the number of Treasury bonds that we sell to the Chinese to pay for them.

    That entire list is untenable, and even proposing such a list is entirely out of touch with reality, as well as any oath to "support and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America".

    "Unexplained affluence", for example, waiting tables to supplement the trust fund, or the "photo shoot", may be legal but socially unacceptable and, therefore, kept quiet.

    To whom is a college student required to report "overseas travel", such as spring break in the islands or Mexico, skiing in Canada, and vacation trips, other, perhaps, than the parents funding their education?

    "information outside the job scope" is called education and all students and faculty are supposed to be seeking that.

    There are no usual work hours for students.

    There are many foreign nationals legally studying and employed in the United States. There is no requirement, nor should there be, for anyone other than holders of certain security clearances to keep track of and report the nationality of the acquaintances, nor their possible position within a foreign government.

    "attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know"? What is "need to know" other than an open-ended control trip? It is a bureaucratic tool most usually used to hide information that is embarrassing to some official or agency, not dangerous. The whole "Freedom of Information Act" is exactly the opposite of its name. Unless there is an immediate danger of physical harm to the citizens of the nation, the information should be published, and not hidden in layers of bureaucracy intended to prevent the citizens of the United States from making informed decisions (yeah, I know, as if they could tear themselves away from the celebrity du jour) about the actions of their government.

    "unexplained absences"? Explain to whom? Besides, all any potential foreign agent would have to say is "I was: hung over; playing StarCraft(or WoW); picking up my clothes from ...", and no one could be suspicious.

  41. Facts from the source by CompMD · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why are slashdot readers more prone to going apeshit insane over a blog post? Here is the website of the actual FBI group that works to protect domestic research and technology. It is a good read and will communicate far more useful, accurate information than a blog post.

    1. Re:Facts from the source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to the source is hardly reassuring. I'll save you the trouble of some clicks:http://www.fbi.gov/page2/april06/academical liance040506.htm
      Shorter FBI: with your cooperation we'll have more academic freedom for research into law enforcement technologies. What more could any university want?

  42. Re:Until they send you to Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forget that the end result is that you will be sent to gitmo and tortured for meeting enough of those requirements. I would call being sent to a gulag and tortured a restriction on your freedom.

  43. It's about time by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1

    In the early 1990s, I met a former Chinese army officer who readily admitted to me that he had worked as an espionage agent while studying in graduate school in the US.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  44. Thinking back to my University years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Thinking back to my University years:

    "Unexplained affluence"
    I splurged on the xtra large pizza with all the toppings.
    The university cops asked where I got the money and I told them to mind their own business.

    failing to report overseas travel
    U.S. Customs already knows, and it's none of the University cop's damn business.

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope
    I'm looking for a promotion, what can I say?

    keeping unusual work hours
    I have classes during the daytime, I have to work nights and weekends.

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals
    The South Korean chick was cute. Wait, she was the only chick in the Engineering department. No, I'm not going to tell you what we were doing at the flagpole at 3AM but no it didn't involve whipped cream.

    unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials
    Remember that trip abroad? It was to South Korea. That chick's dad is a Sergeant in their Army.

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know
    Um, I didn't NEED to know the combination to the Dean's office safe, but how else was I going to get the dead rat in there?

    and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.
    I wasn't about to rat out my new frat brothers for hazing me too hard. I can still taste the puke but it was worth it since Brother Able got me that first interview 4 years later.

    1. Re:Thinking back to my University years by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      "Unexplained affluence"
      I splurged on the xtra large pizza with all the toppings. I know that when I was in college, giving my roommate pizza would definitely cause some affluence later on. We learned just to keep the windows open.
    2. Re:Thinking back to my University years by thesupraman · · Score: 1


      I really really really do hope that you know that South Korea is quite a strong US ally, with
      a very strong US military presence, and quite a low chance of being at all interested
      in US 'secrets', hmmm?

  45. Re:Deceptive headline designed to distort the trut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be new here. Never forget this is slashdot where a Republican or Republican lead government can do no right and everything they do is really an effort to destroy our freedom.

  46. UNEXPLAINED AFFLUENCE - library closures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if your library closes? With books that are out of print that got thrown in the trash? How will you prove you got it out of a book in the 80's..? (shaking)

  47. How foreign operatives collect data on tech by thewiz · · Score: 1

    They read /. just like the rest of us.

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
  48. graduate students??? by DeadDarwin · · Score: 0

    "keeping unusual hours" ?????? awsome i should show this to my advisor and postpone all the meetings after 2008 elections !

  49. shenanigans! by dotmax · · Score: 1
    The cited article was originally written for The World Socialist Web Site. The guidelines http://www.ncix.gov/archives/docs/Your_Role_in_Com bating_the_Insider_Threat.pdfcited were clearly intended for classified materials workers.

    I call shenanigans!

  50. Unreported? to whom? by ukemike · · Score: 1

    What is this "unreported contact with foreign governement, military, or intelligence officials", or "unreported contact with foreign nationals"? Who the f#c% are people supposed to report this kind of harmless stuff to?

    OH NO! a bunch of Mexicans work for the company that cleans our office space, gotta call the FBI!
    OH NO! my neighbor works at the French Consulate, gotta report our argument about the hedge to the CIA!
    OH NO! that student in class next to me is from another country, gotta call the NSA!!
    OH NO! a fleeting wave of curiosity just passed over me, gotta report myself to Alberto Gonzales!!

    As far as the unusual work hours for academics, maybe they mean that 8-5 is suspicious?

    --
    -- QED
  51. Unusual hours? by haluness · · Score: 1

    That's funny - what's the usual hours for a graduate student? Or even an assistatn prof? I've work night's, mornings, afternoons - I'd probably have been picked if this was considered back when I was in grad school

  52. thin end of the wedge... by joe+155 · · Score: 1

    "unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials

    OK, I might give them this.
    "

    I had contact whilst in my first year of university with a nice guy who worked in Islamabad for the Pakistan government. I think he was based in the intelligence side of their civil service. I had a few beers with him and his friend and we talked for a bit. I saw him a few times after that but not in any great detail. Under these rules would I have had to have known that I would meet him before I did and file a report 3 months ago so that I could speak to him? should I report everything that we talked about to the nice friendly agent after (which was generally just lamenting the politicisation of the civil service in both our countries).

    Its not even like this sort of thing is a one off, I also met an officer from the Norwegian army on a night out, he was alright to talk to... bought me a pint. One of my friends is a foreign national who is being conscripted when he gets back to his native country - would that count too?

    These rules seem like they would be completely unworkable in the real world setting of a modern university. You should not support any of the ideas.

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
  53. Who is on the spot here? by zugvogel · · Score: 1
    I believe counter-espionage in part of the FBI's job description. If this is true then the FBI is just doing their job here. A job they have been conditioned to do unconditionally, without consideration of "secondary" considerations like what should be acceptable interference in a free and open society.

    It is us "free and brave" Americans who are failing our ideals if we change our lawful behavior by one iota because of what the government regards as suspicious. If we are all (or an unmanageable big number of us) are suspect, then (hopefully) suspicion will be meaningless.

  54. ...and? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That changes nothing about what the original poster was saying. Vastly overstating a case does no good, and often does harm. If you tell me that the government is severely fucking over my freedoms, and I then come to discover you are full of shit, I am much less likely to listen to you in the future. The whole "boy who cried wolf" thing.

    If you want to get your message out you need to be accurate. In this case, this whole thing is amazingly overstated. The guidelines are for people with security clearance, and the FBI isn't suggesting that universities apply them to students. That isn't to argue that this is a good thing, but please let's be accurate with what is going on.

    Slashdot could be a pretty good source for news on governmental restrictions of freedom, but most of the time they vastly overstate what is going on. Thus it doesn't take someone long to conclude the people are full of shit and start ignoring it. Trying to rationalize it with a pithy saying does nothing but further show that it is about sensationalism, not truth.

    1. Re:...and? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      The guidelines are for people with security clearance

      Pfft. It's not well known, but "security clearance" doesn't mean you're working on something with national security. A friend of mine had to get some kind of security clearance years ago to work on a physics project funded by the DOE. It didn't have anything to do with national security, bomb making, or the like.

      --
      AccountKiller
    2. Re:...and? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      But if they were accurate on stuff like this, they wouldn't work everyone that doesnt haev time to read the story ito a frenzy.

      It also gives the Bush bashers an excuse to bitch and moan ( as pretty obvious from upper posts )

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:...and? by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
      Wow, nurb432, you are sooooo right. Those dirty Bush bashers, after all, what other outstanding presidency has brought the American people the state of affairs where the major topics of discourse are:

      torture, illegal wiretapping and spying on the citizenry, and election fraud???

    4. Re:...and? by nurb432 · · Score: 1, Troll

      I *never* said he was perfect. It just has gotten really old to hear them complain that *everything* bad that goes on in government ( hell, even non government if you listen to the real wackos ) is his fault. It almost started from day one and i personally and sick of hearing it.

      The 'system' has been around long before him, will be long after him. Besides the president does not have *that* much power in the first place. Its the *system* that is at fault for most of the wrongs in government, not one man.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    5. Re:...and? by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, whether you like it or not, things have gotten several magnitudes worse on Bush watch..

      And by your signature, one can see you are a bit wacko. Saying Booth was a patriot is like saying Lee Harvey Oswald was a patriot. So, yes, you are a loony.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    6. Re:...and? by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Besides the president does not have *that* much power in the first place

      You haven't been paying attention. Between the signing statements, warrant-less wiretapping, war against a nation without a declaration of war and thus the express permission of Congress and the American people (such as the war powers dictate), I'd say Bush has exploited more power than any one person in the history of this country.

      Let's not forget the Patriot Act, the Dept. of Homeland Security, or appointing a crony as AG who turns around and purges the Dept. of Justice of lawyers and replaces them with Bush-loyalists, either.

      How about a more recent event, in which both offices of the executive branch are failing to comply with their own executive order regarding the handling of secret information?

      Need more? The list is long with this guy.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    7. Re:...and? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      That changes nothing about what the original poster was saying. Vastly overstating a case does no good, and often does harm. If you tell me that the government is severely fucking over my freedoms, and I then come to discover you are full of shit, I am much less likely to listen to you in the future. The whole "boy who cried wolf" thing.

      If you want to get your message out you need to be accurate. In this case, this whole thing is amazingly overstated. The guidelines are for people with security clearance, and the FBI isn't suggesting that universities apply them to students. That isn't to argue that this is a good thing, but please let's be accurate with what is going on.

      Slashdot could be a pretty good source for news on governmental restrictions of freedom, but most of the time they vastly overstate what is going on. Thus it doesn't take someone long to conclude the people are full of shit and start ignoring it. Trying to rationalize it with a pithy saying does nothing but further show that it is about sensationalism, not truth.


      You can cry wolf as often as you want as long as the cry is wrapped in the appropriate ideological rhetoric and bullshit. See the same stupid shits beat the same stupid drum about "gay marriage ruining our families", "abortion ruining our communities", "interracial marriage ruining our clean white blood line", "IP copyright infringement ruining artists ability to create", "Evolution ruining our future zealots and fanatics". IF anything history tells us that if you don't wrap your message in so much sesationalist bullshit and rhetoric you will be ignored.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    8. Re:...and? by king-manic · · Score: 1


      But if they were accurate on stuff like this, they wouldn't work everyone that doesnt haev time to read the story ito a frenzy.

      It also gives the Bush bashers an excuse to bitch and moan ( as pretty obvious from upper posts )

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----


      Clearly a unbiased individual with good spelling and valid point. /sarcasm

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    9. Re:...and? by fermion · · Score: 1
      In an idealistic world, yes. But in the real world power trumps the truth. Sticking to the facts is suicide. Power is achieved through the manipulation of the facts. If one is smart, that manipulation is defensible, as it is in this case. Based on patterns of past behaviors, it is reasonable that the FBI is using this as a leading edge to gain more power. We see this in the unauthorized wire tapping. We see this in the reduction of privacy of library records. We see this in the continued commercials encouraging kids to report their parents.

      But even if the lie is not defensible, it is still too useful to give up. Joe Mccarthy lied right to the american public, and was rewarded with the power of life and death over every american citizen. Our current president lied right to the american people and was rewarded with a reelection and the power to evesdrop on any citizen he wishes, with no oversight, not to mention the power to kill as many people as he wishes. Rush does not even pretend to factual, and the drug addict is rewarded with huge sums of money.

      Facts are only of concern to people who care more about process than success, and in most cases over-caring of process does not bring power. True, it was the higher morality of our founding fathers that made the US great, the morality that caused them not to torture no matter what the enemy did, the morality that made enemies into friends, the morality that lead to the first recorded peaceful turnover of powers in the world. But such morality is clearly gone, replaced with a drive for unmitigated power.

      And how can we respond when people say that oil is too high because the towel heads are too stupid to accept our help? Or when the state of the economy is due to the unfair competition of the yellows? Or when we can't get a loan because fo the five jew bankers? Pr that they gayness of new york lead god to smite the citizens through the power of the jet airplane? By trying to push liberal guilt or pc rhetoric? I think not. When someone wants to tap my phone, or enter my house, or infinge on my right to educate myself or practice my religion in the privacy of my own home or private sacred space, or for that matte own a missile, I bring up the trump card. We have enshrined these freedoms in our constitution because this country is founded on the proposition that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. And damn if I am going to let another King George take away these rights, that are my birth right as a birth citizen of the US, just because a few losers prefer fascism to freedom.

      So yes, one can soft shoe the FBI's infringement of the right of every person in the US to pursue happiness and become educated, and one can say that a little infringement is not really going to hurt anyone. But to believe it is to live in a state of fear that I have no use for.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    10. Re:...and? by Vellmont · · Score: 1

      The signing statements will take a ruling by the courts to make them invalid. Congress can't do squat about them. The warrantless wiretapping is also a court issue. Declaring war on another nation was approved by the congress.

      Patriot act, homeland security, and the crony AG are all approved by congress. They failed to make a no-confidence vote in him, not that it matters since only the President can fire him.

      The point here is that the President only has power because the Congress has been mostly rubber-stamping what he does. They've been a _little_ better lately with the Democrats taking over, but even then they wind up handing over more money for the Iraq war.

      George Bush and his gang of crap can certainly be blamed for being extrodinarly terrible politicians, leaders, and decision makers. I'm not sure you can blame them for having too much power when the rest of the system isn't acting properly to stop that. I'm also not sure the President really has that much power to begin with, as some of the power you're referring to is in the Congress, which is using its power to not do anything. (Yes, I do believe not acting when you can is an expression of power).

      --
      AccountKiller
    11. Re:...and? by corbettw · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      war against a nation without a declaration of war and thus the express permission of Congress and the American people (such as the war powers dictate)

      Yeah, because no American President has ever invaded or attacked another country without a declaration of war before.

      Wilson -> Mexico, Russia
      Truman -> Korea
      Johnson -> Vietnam
      Nixon -> Cambodia
      Carter -> Iran
      Reagan -> Grenada, Libya
      Bush Sr. -> Iraq, Panama
      Clinton -> Bosnia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq

      It's exactly that kind of overstatement that is the problem. You don't have to like Bush's policies, but please don't pretend that he's doing something unique and original. In many ways, he's simple standing on the shoulders of giants, so to speak.

      This is why I really really hope that Rodham-Clinton or Obama win in 2008: maybe then the left in this country will realize that ALL politicians are lying scum out to ruin our rights. But then they ignored Clinton's excesses for eight years, so they can probably ignore someone else's for four or eight more.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    12. Re:...and? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The "cry wolf" issue is pretty good point. For example since I'm in a different country and I know the FBI actually attempt to use lie detector pseudoscience in law enforcement I find it difficult to consider them a credible source of information on anything even when I should.

    13. Re:...and? by dharbee · · Score: 1

      "torture, illegal wiretapping and spying on the citizenry, and election fraud???"

      LBJ. What do I win?

    14. Re:...and? by dharbee · · Score: 1

      OOOH Good one! Because he has typos, you can safely dismiss his point.

      "Clearly a unbiased"

      So, now I get to do the same to you.

    15. Re:...and? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Cleary his point is suspect due to his signature. His over all lack of any real information about the world is apparent from his other posts and his grammar just helps make a point that you cannot take him seriously.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    16. Re:...and? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      No, i call it typos and lack of proof reading.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    17. Re:...and? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps its just your incorrect, twisted, and biased view of the world, and not my so called 'lack of real information'.

      And its apparent that you don't even understand my signature in the slightest. Think outside the tiny little box you operate out of sometime.

      Just for the record, grammar and typo checking here isn't worth the trouble.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    18. Re:...and? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps its just your incorrect, twisted, and biased view of the world, and not my so called 'lack of real information'.

      And its apparent that you don't even understand my signature in the slightest. Think outside the tiny little box you operate out of sometime.

      Just for the record, grammar and typo checking here isn't worth the trouble.


      The only context your signature makes sense for me is from a confederate perspective. To the south he may have been a patriot, risking his life to murder a man for ideological reasons. However in an American context the assasin of a well regaurded Us president is by definition not a patriot. His motivation was disatisfaction with the souths defeat as well as objecting to Slaves voting.

      combining this confederate bent with some of the truly ignroant "bomb them all" comments you've made frames you as a ignorant Bigot. If this isn't true would you want to clarify your position.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    19. Re:...and? by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

      You have to keep all those many Unitary Executive signing statements Bush included along with every congressional bill he signed - the first time in US history a president signed a bill stating unequivocally he was exempt - clearly unconstitutional - as has everything else been which Bush has done.....

  55. Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours..."

    That describes pretty much any nerd on the planet.

  56. Great indicators... by Trerro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "FBI is offering to brief faculty, students and staff on what it calls 'espionage indicators' aimed at identifying foreign agents. Unexplained affluence You mean, like the affluence that lets you afford the world's most expensive university system?

    failing to report overseas travel Yes, I'm sure the when the student visits his family on spring break, he's going to be in a huge hurry to file a report.

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope Oh noes! A FOREIGN SCHOLAR is interested in learning. EVERYBODY PANIC!

    keeping unusual work hours Ignoring the joke majors, good luck finding a college student who DOESN'T occasionally need to do work at 5 AM, whether the result of too much work, too much procrastination, or as is usually the case, both.

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals Yeah, I'm sure he's going to fill out paperwork every time he has an IM conversation with a friend from his home country.

    unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials This is probably about the only item on this entire list that DOES deserve attention, though even here - it better be military and intelligence, as 'government' includes things like the guys he's getting the loan from.

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know Horrifically vague. There's a big difference between asking for a tour of a building relevant to your major so you know how things actually work, and trying to lie your way into a military base. I suppose the 'need to know' clause is supposed to fix that problem, but it doesn't. If you have enough of a passion for learning that you're coming overseas to do it, you're probably a rather curious person by nature, and probably have quite a bit of random knowledge that you don't 'need to know.'

    and unexplained absences Does anyone seriously bother to explain to most of their professors why they were absent? Can anyone say with a straight face that they've NEVER cut class without a valid reason - ESPECIALLY when you get that one professor you know you're going to learn absolutely nothing from? Overall, this list might not be quite as bad as the old duct tape announcement, but it does show about the same level of paranoia.
    1. Re:Great indicators... by Jehosephat2k · · Score: 2, Funny

      When I was teaching I told my students that they were only allowed one Grandparent per quarter. I had one quarter where someone had both of their gradparents "die". I saw the student at a bar when they were supposed to be in Dallas.

  57. It's designed to not end by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The nation has been de-balled. It is a fait accompli. Neutered. It's mostly over, and the goons won. You can't do anything about it besides *talk*, and pretty soon that will be going the way of speech in china, their poster boy model nation, full technology, full police state, one major party, in the US it is the globalist party with two wings and their platform is full technofeudalism...

        If you do anything besides talk, it is considered a major crime, and you therefore are a criminal, maybe a "terrorist", so it becomes self fulfilling prophecy of their's.

      I remember a lot of civil disobedience to try and stop thoroughly disgusting governmental action, and it was dangerous then, but now, it is beyond dangerous, and they just won't put up with it. They have all the power they need now and plenty of order followers and a cowed-enough population who have more interest in entertainments and just making a living, a desperate living for a lot of people. Bread and circuses tempered with governmental "legal terrorism" makes for a controlled population.

    Voting doesn't work, that is obvious. Even among the intellectually aware and politically active, the meme of "don't waste your vote!!!" is still quite strong and repeated endlessly, like some cult chant, and results in the same type and form and demographic makeup of government, election after election after election, which is, the completely corrupt R and D power sharing cartel which has hijacked government and runs it as a power and jobs sharing racket.

    I vote, but it is inertia, more to say I still vote than for any expectation it will actually mean anything.

    The short phrase is *sigh*

    What's left, blog about it? You can't even go protest, step outside of the completely illegal and unConstitutional "free speech zones" and their mercenaries will arrest and/or beat you. Be a big enoug hassle to them, you go on the lists, and eventually won't be able to travel or change jobs even. It's coming. The population has sucked up the no fly list so far, no protests, meekly stand in line for the perv search and the humbling glares.

    I knew once that got accepted without mass protest it was all over.

    And stuff like that. Too tired to list them all, but there's a big list.

    I'm not a pessimist, but I will consider myself a realist. We have a defacto low threshold but growing fast one party police state. It is only going to get worse for a long time to come now. They have found out they can get away with the largest crimes, with no revolt from the people, and a mostly controlled and tame media who go along with it, so small crimes are just part of the system now.

    I think the best people can do now is try and stay as free and independent as possible, especially inside their own hearts, and see what opportunities present themselves in the future. Who knows, pigs may fly someday and we might get humble and honest and decent government some election time.

    It could happen. Low odds, but still possible.

  58. Overreaction! by tytso · · Score: 1

    Reading the guidelines which the FBI purported to have given various University administrators, it is very clearly talking about ways of protecting classified information. In practice, most students do not have access to classified information, and so this would never even be an issue. For example, at MIT there is simply no classified research which takes place on the MIT Campus (MIT Lincoln Labs is not part of the MIT Campus), and I suspect this is true at most universities, simply because the requirements for keeping classified information and maintaining clearances for university employees and students are probably too obstrusive and too difficult for a university environment, all aside from the philosophical issues of whether or not doing classified research can be reconciled with an open academic environment.

    So I think the blog "article" is making much ado over nothing. The document referenced by the article very clearly was not intended to be applied to all students, and only where classified information is concerned. It's identical to the sort of briefings that would be given to people in industry who hold clearances, at for people who hold certain level of clearances, it is required that they get briefed on this sort of thing once a year. But if you don't like that sort of thing, the answer is very simple; don't apply for or hold a security clearance.

  59. Unusual work hours by Repton · · Score: 1

    Yeah, when I was at uni, I didn't trust the 9-5 types either..

    --
    Repton.
    They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
  60. FFS by flushingmemos · · Score: 1

    The feds (who I have no love for, as a leftie who knows what they and the CIA have done to the left over the years - see the CIA's soon-to-be-declassified "family jewels,") are just offering to give university folks a briefing on what a spy looks like. That's OK. Everyone knows universities are hotbeds of espionage. That's not terrorism, not warfare, just trying to steal secrets, pass on information, primarily technical. I fear spies less than muggers and burglars, and I hate the hyper-paranoid national security types. But this is just a list ways you can tell who ISN'T a spy: doesn't have a bunch of money, isn't jetting off every other weekend, isn't hanging around with creepy people of the type who composed this list. It's good information, and people who don't think that espionage happens are silly. It's not a big deal, except in certain cases, and not worth getting worked up about in either direction - making this list or criticizing this list. I just appreciate the paranoid spooks telling me what a spy looks like - they probably know, so it's good information. As for "restricting freedom," this doesn't sound like any sort of policy that's going to be enacted. It's just an informational briefing the feds are offering! Lighten up!

  61. The espionage-mania by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is well known from the former Soviet Union and socialist countries. Everyone behaving strange must be a spy. I have some friends -entomologists who spend som time in jail. Walking with butterfly net is a bit strange, isn't it?

  62. asdfasdf by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    According to the PERSEREC study, "one-fourth of known American spies experienced a personal life crisis (such as a divorce, death of someone close, or a love affair gone awry) in the months before they decided to attempt espionage."
    Uh, so if only 25% had a life crisis, then that seems like a poor indicator. Moreover, what portion of people who have life crises go on to commit espionage? Since pretty much everyone has had one, I'm guessing it's negligible.

    • Drug or alcohol abuse.
    • Repeated irresponsibility.
    • An "above the rules" attitude.
    • Financial irresponsibility.
    • Repeated impulsive behaviors.
    • Extreme immaturity.
    • Willingness to violate the rights of others to achieve one's own ends.
    • Accumulating or overwhelming life crises or career disappointments.
    • Willingness to break rules or violations of laws and regulations.
    With the exception of the 3rd to last, that describes a lot of people in college, and probably myself back in the day. Alcohol abuse? Check. Irresponsibility & financial irresponsibility? Check. Impulsive behavior? Check. Extreme immaturity? Probably an understatement. Of course, I realized all that was leading somewhere I didn't want to go and I changed my course, but even so, a lot of freshmen would fit that criteria.

    And while all of their indicators are pertinant to government employees, especially those in law enforcement or military, they make little to no sense in the world of academia:

    • Unexplained affluence.
    • Failing to report overseas travel.
    • Showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope.
    • Keeping unusual work hours.
    • Taking classified material home.
    • Unreported or concealed contacts with foreign nationals.
    • Unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials.
    • Attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know.
    • Unexplained absences.
    To whom exactly is a student supposed to report, aside from the IRS in the case of finance? And I've never heard of someone getting classified training at a university (althogh maybe that's the idea). I'm fairly certain that the purpose of universities is to expand the whole of human knowledge, not to partition it off and keep it secret. Most universities allow pretty much anyone to sit in on a class, even if they're not enrolled (provided there's room and they're not disruptive of course). Aside from that, limiting information to those who've paid for it (enrolled) doesn't sound like a particularly secure system.
  63. Re:Deceptive headline designed to distort the trut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So where did you last travel? For how long? Who did you see? Where did you get that money? Why are you interested in physics where your job/field of study is computing? Your papers citizen, now.

    If you aren't offended by these questions YOU are what is wrong with your country.

  64. Sounds like the cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the cold War,

    In the USSR of the cold war people had to write contact reports every time they met a foreigner because the KGB was watching everything.... i can see that the US wants to emulate the system...

    Good Going

  65. The list certainly needs refinement by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    Reviewing the source documents, I note that this list applies only to people with security clearances. So it is not as bad as the summary or article suggest. However, one wonders about whether there is an attempt to push a broader applicability of the list and then hide behind a few words that people may glance over....

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  66. Re:Deceptive headline designed to distort the trut by 0x0000 · · Score: 1

    Instead, the FBI is advising these universities on how they can protect themselves from those that would steal important research.

    As bad as the government might be, I don't see what good it does to distort the facts.

    Given that

    1. the average university administrator is probably at least as apt as the average /. poster to distort facts and misunderstand government policies and actions
    2. it remains implicit in the issuance of such "guidelines" that if the behaviors described are observed, action should follow
    3. channels for the implied actions facilitated by these guidelines will certainly be put in place (probably have been already)
    4. there is a massive potential for abuse of such guidelines and their associated reporting and action channels at every level from that of students jealous of other students, up to and including the administrative level of the FBI
    5. such potential for abuses of such a "brother's keeper" system have never, in human history (to the best of my knowledge) gone untapped

    I estimate that the probability that abuses - both willful abuse of the System, and unintentional [due to lack of understanding and simple stupidity] - will be perpetrated by all parties to the application of these guidelines approaches Unity.

    I state as a corollary that the abuses which must take place will be amplified by the broader political and socio-ethnic-economic climate for maximum damage to the victims, who will almost certainly not be terrorists, or even remotely connected to terrorism.

    Now if they had done this back in the 1970s when the Bush family was getting all their Saudi friends into US colleges, then maybe - just maybe - some of those holders of student visas at that time would not have become the Al Qaeda support network they later became... but that's water under the bridge, now.

    If the FBI is really interested in stopping Terror and protecting State Secrets, they should, perhaps raid the Skull'n'Bones frat house... I'm sure the tribes would like to get Geronimo's skull back, at least, and its theft [by a scion of the Bush Dynasty, iirc] was a Federal crime. How's that for undistorted fact? Note that the theft of a skull is almost certainly in violation of local. municipal, and perhaps reservation ordinances against grave-robbery, as well - depending on the jurisdiction.

    --
    "The Internet is made of cats."
  67. The Feds match the profile by brian_d_w · · Score: 1
    From the cited document:


    POTENTIAL ESPIONAGE INDICATORS
    Repeated irresponsibility.
    An "above the rules" attitude.
    Financial irresponsibility.
    Repeated impulsive behaviors.
    Extreme immaturity.
    Willingness to violate the rights of others to achieve one's own ends.
    Accumulating or overwhelming life crises or career disappointments.
    Willingness to break rules or violations of laws and regulations.
    According to this the executive branch should be reported.
  68. Parent and Souce Article Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The linked article plainly states in the first paragraph that people will be unable to do this and that, blah blah blah. Then the rest of the article explains that the FBI is simply asking people to keep a look out for these kinds of behaviors. Sure, that is kind of freaky, but the whole gist of the headlines and the first paragraph is pure flamebait, fear mongering, moveon.org Bull S**t.

    G*d D**M reporters can't just tell it straight, they always have to put their own personal paranoid spin on things.

  69. Public vs Private by Worthless_Comments · · Score: 1

    My question, and do forgive me if I overlooked this in the article, is how would this affect private universities? I'll be attending one in just a couple of months, and I know they operate under different guidelines than a public university, so how would something like this affect a student at a private university?

  70. good luck with that... by bigbigbison · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm a grad student and I have a hard enough time turning my student's grades in on time. I doubt I'm going to get around to report anything to the FBI. I'm making less than $13000 a year. That isn't enough for me to spy on my students. Give me a few thousand and I might think about it.

    --
    http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
  71. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Failing to tell your local Dietrician that you produced stool samplings will result in Thoughtcrime.

  72. Sounds like any gov. agency is suspect by grundy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Warning signs from the FBI document:

    Repeated irresponsibility.
    An "above the rules" attitude.
    Financial irresponsibility.
    Repeated impulsive behaviors.
    Extreme immaturity.
    Willingness to violate the rights of others to achieve one's own ends.
    Willingness to break rules or violations of laws and regulations.

    Sounds like most gov'ment agencies, FBI, CIA, Congress, Executive Branch, etc. etc. etc. Phone it in, start the investigation...

  73. Any one of these... by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    Any one of these; even a few of them together, might not be cause for concern. But if you start seeing several of these signs for one individual it might be time to start worrying. I think they're on the right track teaching people to be aware, but they need to teach these same people not to be ludicrous. Witch hunts went out of fashion along time ago afterall...

  74. Let's get some perspective here... by Independent+Voter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm a huge civil libertarian and in fact will be engaging in some ACLU protest activities this week in DC. But this article on Slashdot is really almost to the point of being misleading. Read the original article and guidance document and you'll see that:

    1) The guidance doc specifically says it is applicable to people with access to classified info. Not just students (unless they're working on classified info).

    2) The guidance doc also goes to some length to say that these signs don't mean someone is a spy, that people should respect each other's privacy and that good judgment needs to exercised when considering whether to report something.

    3) These are not being foisted on universities and there is no apparent attempt to try to get universities to enforce these guidelines. This is essentially a "heads up" list of things that often are associated with people who spy.

    And remember: these are guidelines for people working on CLASSIFIED info. I HOPE people who work on (legal) classified projects keep an eye out for these kinds of things.

    Now if we could only keep the USDOJ from spying on us without any court oversight, I'd feel MUCH better!

    1. Re:Let's get some perspective here... by liamcaden · · Score: 1

      Can you do us a favor and find out why the mainstream news outlets are not covering a grassroots movement to impeach GWB and Dick Cheney?

      --
      "The same thing we do every night, try to take over the world" -The Brain (Pinky&the Brian)
  75. It Beats Working. by twitter · · Score: 1

    A humorless AC Troll taunts:

    You've posted on average about 4 times a day on this site since you registered ... You're already on the [no life] list by default.

    Big Sigh. I do wish I could be independently wealthy, like your boss Bill Gates, but I'm afraid that I have to work for a living. As long as I have a job or have to use a computer to look for one, the posts you love so much will be around. By the way, when did I register? You people are so much better at tracking that kind of unimportant thing than I am. Would you also be so kind as to post my M$ file one day? The way you people think makes me laugh.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:It Beats Working. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Would you also be so kind as to post my M$ file one day?"

      that can crtainly be arranged willy. here, to the brlug, to your inbox and many other places. even the ones you dont know about. over and over and over. i can start running that script again, if you want. just ask nicely, it would be my pleasure.

    2. Re:It Beats Working. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      twitter, if you ignore the trolls they'll go away.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    3. Re:It Beats Working. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you honestly suggesting that Bill Gates just gained all his money by snapping his fingers, and that he didn't have to work for it?

      You're so deluded it's fucking hilarious.

  76. Security clearance by Descalzo · · Score: 1

    Here is an interesting page about security clearance. It looks like it's specific to the Department of Defense. Look especially at the page on financial considerations.

    --
    I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
  77. in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    universities are considering to outsource themselves so their freedom is no longer a threat to national security.

  78. FBI by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Ultimately, it's a good thing that the FBI is protecting us. By monitoring students, we can make the USA so much like Iran that Islamic extremists will start supporting America, not fighting it.

    Secret detention centers, an unaccountable police force, an excessively powerful and secretive security force, and a war-based economy. Hmm... what does that remind me of? And now, we have government harassment of students, as if they're the only ones who ever support terrorists (rather than the US government itself, which paid for the formation of most of these terrorist groups in the first place).

  79. The 50's were the days by stimpleton · · Score: 1

    Reds under the Bed.

    It worked for McCarthy, it must work for the FBI again.

    http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/12/12/reviews/9912 12.12hambyt.html

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
  80. Suggestions are often more than they seem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Governmental "suggestions" can easily become more that what they legally are:

    Look at the Red Scare. I would challange anyone to point to a law that made it illegal to employ someone who held leftist views. Yet, even though there was no law, there were many people who were blacklisted -- they could get no work in Holywood -- due to thier political beliefs.

    So now, we have the FBI "suggesting" to academia and universities how they can stop terrorism. Yet, some of the things that the FBI is suggesting that are predictive of terrorism are things that define what a student's experience should contain.

    If universities start following the suggestions, you will have same thing that happened in the 50's happen now. If you say that this is not a real threat to freedom because it is not a law, then you really don't understand how the world works.

    The time to speak out against things like this is now. It is not when universities start following the suggestions, and it is definitely before an actual law is passed.

  81. Creepy? by guruevi · · Score: 1

    This starts sounding a lot like pre-WWII Germany and the Soviet Union. Anybody done anything out of the usual, please report here, we'll investigate them, then we'll tag them (now we can do that with an embedded chip instead of with a triangle or a star).

    What's next? I thought universities were to be the equivalent of the Greek knowledge centers where smart minded people come together to come up with even smarter things. No government, no rules are necessarily needed, a bunch of smart people should be able to govern themselves I guess.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Creepy? by mikaw · · Score: 0

      And let's not forget Stasi.

  82. Re:Deceptive headline designed to distort the trut by wytcld · · Score: 1

    the FBI is advising these universities on how they can protect themselves from those that would steal important research.

    One positive side effect of the trend among university researchers to want to cash in big on their research is that the last thing they're going to do is let anybody "steal" it. A main effect of that is negative: the chilling of sharing on the frontiers of knowledge; but these people are protecting their precious IP even from colleagues who obviously aren't spies. We should feel sorry for the spies in this environment.
    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  83. Ridiculous reporting by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

    Exactly what freedoms did the article state were being restricted? I didn't see any such thing - merely some sort of awareness training for university administrators.

    I all don't understand what exactly is the deal here regarding the research being discussed. Unclassified research is published in academic journals or reported in symposia that are freely available world-wide. There is no reason for anyone to spy on such research. The list of behaviors that was disscussed was the result of a DIA study regarding protecting compartmentalized secrets - very different from academic research.

  84. Confusing, but by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Confusing, but here is what I have to say anyways.

    Unless the FBI plans on making this into law, their wanting to do whatever has no legal effect.

    Do you honestly believe this will affect what students do? Good universities won't stand for restricting freedoms.

    1. Re:Confusing, but by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      Unless the FBI plans on making this into law, their wanting to do whatever has no legal effect. Oh great, now we've got the FBI making laws. Whatever happened to the constitution?
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  85. Slashdot Articles: Broken English, Bad Grammar! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - way to go, /.!

    - you're showing that your editorial department is staffed by autistic feral miscreants with a lack of schooling!

    - does anyone read these items before posting?

  86. Unbiased by SoulReaverDan · · Score: 1

    Does anyone have a link to an article about this movement that ISN'T slanted so far it's almost vertical? I'm interested in reading into the details, but don't want to be shoved with either OMG US R DOOMED or trying to sugarcoat it.

  87. everyone here could be on that list by timmarhy · · Score: 1

    since when do i need to "report" every thing i do to anyone? this thing reads like a paranoia manual.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:everyone here could be on that list by Jehosephat2k · · Score: 1

      Everyone here "is" on that list, silly. Now you are.

  88. Not Working, Nothing New There. by twitter · · Score: 1

    The AC Troll tries to be manacing:

    "Would you also be so kind as to post my M$ file one day?"
    that can crtainly be arranged willy. here, to the brlug, to your inbox and many other places. even the ones you dont know about. over and over and over. i can start running that script again, if you want. just ask nicely, it would be my pleasure.

    Spamming the BRLUG was creepy, but it did not go very far. They all laughed too and told you to fuck off. Like everyone else, you dirt bags only have the power to disgrace yourselves.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  89. no, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    no no one told me to fuck off, because that wasnt me. but as i remember people were more amused than anything else, with someone pointing out that you were a troll. is that why you dont do the m$ windblows thing in the lug? because youre just ashamed of that, with people that actually know who you are. i can post a link to that thread on the mailing list, if you want. i can be 'manacing' and all that. we are a lot of cool threads there

    otherwise, dont get all cocky, ok? just carry on....

  90. Mod parent up by Idbar · · Score: 1

    Wow, I hope you can be modded +100. Too bad I wasted my points on useless comments :(

  91. Ignorance is strength by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1

    failing to report overseas travel

    Since when do you have to report overseas travel?

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope

    On my planet, this is called "ambition". It's a highly desirable quality in an employee.

    keeping unusual work hours

    All programmers and independent contractors are obviously spies, right?

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals

    Like what, eating at El Torito three nights in a row? Or joining the Swedish-American friendship organization so you can schmooze all those hot Swedish exchange students?

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know

    Like trying to get on the ACL for that groovy large-format inkjet printer, even though you're "only" an English major?

    unexplained absences

    Of course, there are never any of those among university students.

    Fucking morons. If the people in charge of our national security are this dimwitted, foreign spies are the least of our problems.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    1. Re:Ignorance is strength by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      I used to have an internship in high school at PENNDOT. I had to meet with the District Engineer over surfing the state-wide SMB share during my downtime. It was very, VERY frowned upon. Why would a high school intern need to be looking at what was really Harrisburg (our capital)'s share?

      From then on, I continued to do so, making sure my "mentor" didn't see me. Why? I learned more there than my mentor could have ever taught me. Even though I was in the Construction Unit, every once in a while I would have to field calls from the truck permits unit. My mentor also worked there when one of the ladies was out sick or on personal leave. But, what's this? An out of state, federal government driver needs a permit to haul environmental wastes over our highways? She didn't know what to do. It took me thirty seconds to find him the form, and find her the instructions to enter it into the automated permit software.

      She then asked me how I knew that, and I obliged. Guess who was browsing G: Drive later that afternoon?

      This pattern has followed me at other jobs - I get yelled at for being nosy, but eventually it turns around to bite them in the ass. I'm a leasing consultant and resident assistant at the off campus housing project I work at, and since I was nosy and went through some of the building specs when I first started, I've got a nice, 8.5x11 sheet with the floor plan and all the dimensions on it. I wasn't really supposed to be going through those binders, but whaddaya know, every time I hand one of those to a parent on a tour, I end up handing them a lease too by the end of the tour.

      But then again, I'm a blond white male, so I can't see anyone ever calling the spooks on me for it, I'll just continue to get yelled at by underachiever bosses - until Europe gets pissed off at each other again.

    2. Re:Ignorance is strength by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      failing to report overseas travel
      Since when do you have to report overseas travel?

      Since you got a seucrity clearance. This is all about security clearances, and has nothing to do with everyday behavior. I mean, here's the section that's being categorized as "attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know":

      Inappropriate, Unusual, or Excessive Interest in Classified Information (outside current assignment)

      • Violation of need-know principle.
      • Inquiries about operations and projects to which he/she no longer has access.

      Does that look like it applies to everyday college students? The dingbat who wrote this article this doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

  92. What do you expect by no-body · · Score: 1
    from spooks?


    If you put your mind on the possibility to seeing monkeys behind every corner for long enough, that possibility gains more reality after a while.

    The spook job attracts particular characters and then, there they are, putting their hours of work in, with excitement.

    The outcome is obvious here.

  93. Re:i spy u spy by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

    Funnily, one of the biggest spies in recent years was a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, extreme member of the Catholic Church(Opus Dei wasn't invented by Dan Brown, despite the fictional nature of the rest of the book), and among the most fervent anti-communists in the FBI.

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  94. FBI WATCH Making cruelty visible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FBI agent found masturbating on UA campus, police say
    DAVID L. TEIBEL
    Tucson Citizen
    An FBI agent faces sex-offense charges after a cleaning woman claimed she found him May 3 masturbating in a women's lavatory on campus, a University of Arizona police spokesman said.
    Ryan Seese, 33, was cited on suspicion of three misdemeanors, public sexual indecency, criminal trespassing and indecent exposure, Sgt. Eugene V. Mejia said, adding Seese was released to an FBI supervisor.
    The woman opened a Student Union restroom stall to clean it and spotted a man playing with himself, Mejia said.
    She ran out of the lavatory and reported the incident to her supervisor, who called police, Mejia said.
    The woman pointed out Seese to an officer taking her report. When the officer tried to stop him, Seese ran into a parking garage just north of the Student Union, where he was caught, handcuffed and cited, Mejia said.
    Though Seese told the officer he was with law enforcement and the officer verified him to be an FBI agent, it was unknown why Seese was at UA or where he was assigned in Arizona.
    Seese's attorney, Leo Plowman, could not be reached Friday. FBI spokeswoman Deborah McCarley said Seese worked for the FBI but she would not confirm whether he was an agent, in accordance with FBI policy.

    Vol.25, No. 07 Oct. 29, 1999
    Sigmund Diamond, Sociologist, Historian and Liberal Activist, Dies at 79
    By A. Dunlap-Smith

    Sigmund Diamond, a professor of sociology and history at Columbia for many years and a defender of radical ideals in the 1940s, '50s and '60s, died at Backus Hospital in Norwich, Conn. on Oct. 14. He was 79 years old.

    Diamond died of esophageal cancer, his wife, Shirley Diamond, said.

    Diamond demonstrated a deep conviction and courage in his support of what were considered revolutionary causes during mid-century: racial equality, fair labor practices, women's rights and the anti-war movement.

    Both his courage and his conviction were tested often in his life and always proved unfailing. During Senator Joseph McCarthy's communist witch hunt in the 1950s, for example, Diamond was asked by the FBI to name names. Although it cost him a job offer from Harvard, he refused.

    The episode later inspired his 1992 book on the period Compromised Campus: The Collaboration of Universities with the Intelligence Community 1945-1955.

    "Sig Diamond was a courageous man who fought against the infiltration of political ideology into university decisionmaking," Columbia Provost Jonathan Cole said. "He was victim in his own day of McCarthyism at one of America's great universities.

    Columbia can feel proud that it took a quality person like Sig Diamond in when others rejected him because of his background and political views. It can also be proud of what he did for Columbia through his teaching and research."

    Born in 1920 in Baltimore, where he stayed to attend college at Johns Hopkins, Diamond's development as a leftist began early in life. Soon after college he joined the United Auto Workers Union. In 1945 he participated in a UAW-CIO sponsored meeting for shop stewards in Tennessee. At night he violated state law by sleeping in a dormitory for blacks, thereby integrating public sleeping quarters in Tennessee for the first time since Reconstruction.

    The following year Diamond was a negotiator of the UAW-CIO contract with the Bendix Aviation Corp. When ratified, it became the first contract to give women equal pay for equal work.

    He returned to school at Harvard in 1949. There he earned a Ph.D. in history. It was upon his graduation in 1953, his wife said, that McGeorge Bundy, a Harvard professor and administrator who later became special assistant to the President for national security affairs in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, withdrew the offer of a job at Harvard when Diamond refused to cooperate with the FBI.

    The incident stained his reputation and caused him to be turned down for teaching posts at all the American colleges and

  95. no attack in 6 years? by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm guessing you don't live in London, Spain, Bali, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, or Iraq. There are in fact organized groups of terrorists out there, and they want to cause real damage. And, sadly, there are far more than a "few hundred" of them and they are hardly "nuts." You're right that the US Government has exaggerated the threat to the American homeland for its own purposes -- most of the terrorists are fighting closer to home to affect governments that have more direct interaction with them -- but to say these organizations don't exist is hiding your head in the sand.

    1. Re:no attack in 6 years? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      ...most of the terrorists are fighting closer to home to affect governments that have more direct interaction with them...

      In other words, fight'em over there, so we wouldn't have to fight'em here? Hmm... Where have I heard that before?

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:no attack in 6 years? by Builder · · Score: 2

      I live in London. I went to work by tube on 7/7. I was back on the tubes by 9/7 (That's 9 July, 2 days after the bombs, just for those of you who write dates the wrong way around ;)) I still ride the tube every day.

      And to ride the tube, I don't have to have silly 'extra security checks' or TSA bullshit that I do when flying. Why is that I wonder?

      I'm not scared of terrorists. I'm scared of fascist governments, which mine is fast becoming.

    3. Re:no attack in 6 years? by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Certainly not from me. You're completely misinterpreting what I wrote. My point was that most terrorists may hate the US in principle, but their real goals are far closer to their homes -- they want power in Middle eastern countries that they see as allies or puppets of the US (and Israel). Consequently we see a lot more terrorism in those countries than in the US per se. But I think US actions as far as "fighting them over there" -- esp the invasion of Iraq -- have exacerbated the problem.

    4. Re:no attack in 6 years? by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      I hear you there. I used to live in Austria. Mid 90's there was a rather large rash of mail-bombs being sent around, both to "j-Random Foreigner" and to diplomats and government officials. A friend of the family actually lost his hand to one. Yeah, we were worried we might be next (Being both Foreigners and Diplomats), but did that stop us from checking out mail?
      Hell No!
      Did we avoid public places?
      Hell No!
      Did we hire bodyguard?
      Hell No! (Though the School and UN buildings did all have armed guards, it was the same number as before)
      Did we take the diplomatic License plates off of our car?
      Hell No!

      My 8th Grade year, my school got firebombed because of NATO's involvement in Bosnia... We went to school, same as normal, the same day, the day after, and every day after that (Though students who suffered from smoke inhalation were excused)

      Rule #1: The terrorists can only win if you let them
      Rule #2: The terrorists win by changing the way you live your live
      Rule #3: If someone is bound-and-determined to hurt/kill you, to the point where they are willing to kill themselves in the process, you can't do a darn thing about it
      Rule #4: One man's "Terrorist" is another man's "Freedom fighter" and until you realize that, you can't understand their motivation, and you have no chance at understanding the Why/Where/When/How or how to prevent

      Given my, albeit rather unique, situation, I can't understand the current "OMG TERRORISTS" attitude, and why everything is being tied to terrorism. I lived within sight of the Iron Curtain. The soviets had tanks, and guard towers, and everything... The Austrians had fishing huts, or fields. They didn't care about border security... (Rule #3 above s/hurt\/kill you/cross the border/) Well, in the winter, we litterally went Ice-skating on a lake that crossed from Austria into Hungary
      In School, our parents had to sign paperwork at the beginning of the year allowing us to be injected with iodine in the case of a nuclear emergency (either upwind meltdown, or nuclear attack), we didn't run "Bomb Drills" or "Lockdown drills"
      My family was a target, as I mentioned above, but we still took public transportation almost every day. It all boils down to rules #1 & #2

      meh enough ranting

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    5. Re:no attack in 6 years? by Builder · · Score: 1

      Could I ask you a favour please?

      Emigrate to America and spread that attitude around a bit. They won't let me in to live and I stopped vacationing and doing business there when they wanted my fingerprints, so I can't do it myself :D

      Seriously, that is the only way to defeat terrorism - by not changing or letting them turn you into a sheeple!

    6. Re:no attack in 6 years? by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      For the record: I am an American, living in Maine right now. I only grew up overseas because my father works for the UN

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    7. Re:no attack in 6 years? by Builder · · Score: 1

      Excellent! It's an honour to meet you then - nice to see someone working to dispel the stereotype :)

  96. let me guess by AlgorithMan · · Score: 1

    FBI is offering to brief [students] on [...] identifying foreign agents
    let me guess
    the agents often sit in front of their computers and have a lot of traffic?
    --
    The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
  97. Gee, FBI... by yams69 · · Score: 1

    ...if you guys are so freakin' smart at detecting espionage, why didn't you know about Robert Hanssen?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen?

  98. taste of reality by BugDoomBug · · Score: 1

    Guys, I am all for freedom and privacy and etc. Believe me, I think the government often steps over bounds.

    However, this article is a bit skewed. What the FBI are offering to brief are the basic indicators that are pretty mirror throughout the government and the armed services, and in industries where they pay attention to security and are included pretty much in every security clearance type annual briefing.

    These are no big deal, people are being asked to watch for them, not to go on a witch hunt. This is the equivalent of telling someone what the "signs of potential suicidal depression" are. They are points people should remember in order to evaluate situations if they arise, and part of the briefing is generally that one indicator in itself is generally nothing, but stacking them is where you get suspicion.

    Now, the moment they start some type of direct monitoring/logging program "just because" I am going to call foil.

  99. Do your worst, loser. by twitter · · Score: 1

    [blah, blah, blah] i can post a link to that thread on the mailing list, if you want. i can be 'manacing' and all that. we are a lot of cool threads there otherwise, dont get all cocky, ok? just carry on....

    I expect nothing less of you idiots than for you to do your worst and to be completely ineffective.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Do your worst, loser. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      innefective at what? at making you look stupid and getting you to post at -1? been done before and can be done again,

      i hope the bluefg don't read this thread, they are the ones that have the 'crown jewels', i just have the script. that could get ugly :)

      let it go willy, its not worth it. trust me.

    2. Re:Do your worst, loser. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It wasn't "[blah, blah, blah]", it was:

      is that why you dont do the m$ windblows thing in the lug? because youre just ashamed of that, with people that actually know who you are

  100. These are unusual behaviors for college kids? by Doctor+High · · Score: 1

    From what I remember of my University days, it was the norm to keep odd hours, and not "report" my contacts with foreigners to anybody in particular. I had many interests outside of my school work and my job. Granted I didn't know many or my fellow students who were consorting with foreign governments, but a lot of the behaviors listed are not out of the norm for college students.

    1. Re:These are unusual behaviors for college kids? by Jehosephat2k · · Score: 1

      "a lot of the behaviors listed are not out of the norm for college students."

      And what does that tell you? >>> http://www.safetystate.com/

  101. Mod parent up by Aenoxi · · Score: 1

    All so easily overlooked... Fitting too that it was posted anonymously

    --
    "The sum of all knowledge does not imply the knowledge of all sums" Kurt Gödel (paraphrased)
  102. Have these people . . . by paleo2002 · · Score: 1

    . . . seen a college classroom lately?

    Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.

    Affluence? My students whine about buying the textbook, but they're out in the hall before class playing a PSP. They always ask strange questions "outside the . . . scope" of the lesson. Contact with military officials - do the army recruiters constantly parked outside the main entrance to campus count? As for unexplained absences, well I'm usually suspicious of the one that have extensive explanations for missing labs and exams.

    All kidding aside, I'm in that classroom for one thing: to educate my students. If the FBI needs someone to do their job for them, then can call in the Geek Squad http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-09-for t-dix-clerk_N.htm

  103. secrets ain't so secret. by Vellmont · · Score: 1


    The next question is: What sort of classified information and research is done at universities? How much of it? What are the counter-intelligence ramifications? What is the appropriate response?

    You'd think that anyone requiring security clearance is working on something super-duper secret that we can't share with the enemies. You'd think that.. but that assumes that the world works on some level of sanity.

    A friend of mine worked on a physics project funded by the DOE about 10 years ago. I remember him telling me about it and being impressed. He quickly gave me the real story. I don't remember exactly what the research entailed, but it wasn't secret, it wasn't some weapons research, it was just a dumb bureocratic requirement.

    So don't take any solace that this only applies to people who need security clearance. Security clearance is a joke.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:secrets ain't so secret. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mainly because half the spies who have ever caused harm to the US would have had no problem getting one. The type of shit that makes you inelligble makes you unappealing as a spy anyway.

  104. Steal this research please by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    For academic work, you do want credit for the work you do, but it is very much to your advantage that people want to use it. So, interest by people in your field in the work you do is a sign of success. There are cases of industrial espionage where work that would lead to a patent on say, a drug, is stolen so that another company can get the advantage. But, baring this, you'd like the other company to license you patent in most cases.

    Even when other researchers use your ideas without giving credit, or worse, misunderstand your clear statements and say that your work supports their work when it does not, they are relying on the credulity of students, who actually have to delve into a subject in detail and form their own opinions on the relability of the offending author.

    So, the situation is much different from that where a researcher in a classified area may become a target for espionage. The guidelines in this case would seem to be more helpful in identifing those most likely to be successful in research: For example: so driven that they'll throw their own money at a project (strange affluence), called on to travel to conferences in other countries (foreign travel), making connections with methods or techniques in other fields (broad range of interests), and working round the clock to meet important deadlines (unusual work hours).
    --
    Get solar power like knowledge (pay as you go): http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

    1. Re:Steal this research please by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      From my reading of the article it is pretty clear that they want to ban all US students, lecturers and employees from posting on slashdot. At interchange of ideas, with people from all nationalities, representing all types of government and posting at all hours of the day or night, and undoubtedly include postings from foreign government, military, or intelligence officials.

      So all you US students, lecturers and employees, immediately stop posting on slashdot, you cheeky lads and lasses, or a the very less forward a copy of all your slashdot postings to your appropriately nominated US Homeland, cranky citizen monitoring Officer.

      I really love the opening statement, Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) Counterintelligence and Security Activity (DAC), that counterintelligence is just so delightfully ambiguous, really does bring to mind the counter intelligence of the person or persons who prepared the report.

      Well according to the report it is only suitable for 'American' spies and will not work on foreign spies, who obviously don't work odd hours, are poorly paid, do not talk to other foreigners, and can always explain their absences (apparently foreigners in America never suffer from UFO kidnappings, a good thing to know if your a foreigner travelling in the US).

      Government departments in all their seriousness can be so much fun to mock, but they really should take a good long hard look in the mirror before they write up some idiot report in order to try and justify their existence.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Steal this research please by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      The basic reason for classifying a subject is to protect sources and methods. Generally, research is going to fall under the methods portion. There is a pretty clear national security interest in not sharing bomb designs or signal intellegence methods for example. Our security services also extend their interest to cover industrial espionage to help our companies protect trade secrets. This conflates a national security interest with what is more a regular law enforcement activity, e.g. against fradulantly obtaining confidential information, and it is not clear that counter intelligents resources or methods should be expended in this way. I don't see why the FISA court should grant powers of domestic surveillance to keep Monanto from losing a patent. They are multi-national in any case and ought to protect their trade secrets in the usual manner through civil enforcement of non-disclosure agreements and such. That foriegn security agencies participate in industrial spying does not seem to me to justify our spending public funds on counter intelligents in these cases.

      There is a clear national security interest in promoting the free exchange of ideas and a vibrant academic research enterprise and in so far as the FBI is acting in a way that harms this interest, they are simply participating in the pattern of incompetence that seems to be pervasive in the DOJ. The whole idea of national defence requires that there be something worth defending. For the US, this is the Constitution and the freedoms it protects, so the DOJ is placing itself in a position harming rather than helping the national defence.

  105. Destroying the Village to Save It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

    The fascists running the US government are working with our enemies to destroy our civilization. I don't care whether they think they're "doing the right thing" or whether they're actually coordinating their attacks.

    Who cares why the invaders burned the Library of Alexandria, or sacked Rome or Constantinople, or leveled Persepolis? They're millennial-scale criminals, still hated by anyone with any sense of history. And we don't even have to live in those ruins. This gang of barbarians has even destroyed ancient ruins not even past millennia had erased. And they're adding the young USA to their hit list.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  106. Grad Students by Helios1182 · · Score: 1

    Your average grad student exhibits almost all of those signs.

  107. Bombing is not new by aepervius · · Score: 3, Informative

    Bombing in the world is not new. What is new is that it is made a propaganda of it, and in addition that people pretend that a single organisation (S.P.E.C.T.R.E.^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z I mean Al Quaeda) is handling the reign and direct all those bombing like a well ordered orchestra. and THAT is the ridiculous part. Long when Bush is gone there will be more bombing in other part of the world. (Heck even maybe in the US, done by one of those anti federal-nut).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  108. it all sounds rather... by mr_musan · · Score: 1

    well like Communist Russia, if there not working for solely and purely for the mother land and reporting everything they do then they are the enemy.

    wernt so many books written calming this is the end of the "American" dream ?

  109. sounds about right by BiOFH · · Score: 1

    Except for one or two things maybe... that accurately describes every fucking grad student in our department.
    And most of the faculty... and staff... and undergrads...

    --
    - I am made of meat.
  110. Ignorance through Strength! by Organic+Brain+Damage · · Score: 1

    Them darn commies are always hanging out at Universities...it's where they can drain us of our precious bodily fluids most easily.

  111. better formatting.. by cygonik · · Score: 1

    ..and after changing my formatting preferences..

    There's a great saying, and it's been said a lot, in different ways, but it boils down to this: If we restrict liberty to attain security, we will have neither.

    No, it's not imaginary. ..and no, it's not being handled well.

    I happen to think that freedom is not just a good thing, but that it is a necessary thing - just as responsibility and accountability are.

    It has also been demonstrated that our government, as it clamps down on terrorism, is sacrificing what I consider to be the lifeblood and identity of the nation - that freedom which many hold dear. The more that freedom is taken, the more likely it is that some people will get severely pissed off. The more pissed off people there are, the more likely it is that there will be pissed off people that are more open to persuasion by unsavory ideals. That would mean a higher likelihood that someone here will bomb things, which is, as far as I'm concerned, not a good condition to be in as a country.

    There are quite a few questions to be answered, that should be funded and looked into.

    What is more likely to cause a breakdown of social order in the united states - loss of freedom, or terrorist bombings?
    How likely is it that we will actually succeed at preventing terrorist bombings using methods that destroy or erode the freedom we ideologically base our national identity on?
    It seems insane that these people want to bomb us. But they are probably not insane. Why did they do it? What motivates these groups? What motivates the leaders of these groups?
    What methods of preventing bombings are successful, and which ones merely seem like they should work, or provide a false sense of security?
    For things we implement because of urgency - are those going as planned? Are they working?
    How can we increase our government's introspection without compromising our capacity to act? ..and most importantly, to me - since we are more and more required to endure the loss of freedoms anyway, are there also government-funded research programs looking into finding new ways to avoid getting bombed -- preferably ones which don't erode or destroy the freedom (and consequentially the security) of the nation?

    I think we should get sociologists, game theorists, political science majors, former military generals, etc. into a working team to attempt to address these kinds of issues. ..of course.. ..aside from the fact that it would be more difficult than getting a party of twelve to agree on a common pizza, it's probably not likely to get funded and implemented in the first place, even if the idea occurs to someone to make a bill for it or some such.

    --
    I am not an atomic playboy.
  112. I'm OT, bite me. Mod parent UP. by SPQR_Julian · · Score: 1

    Damn, I come home to read this and my mod points JUST expired. Damn.

  113. How are they going to tell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'failing to report overseas travel' Um. Is not that the ultimate part of the freedome of being a student. Overseas travel on a budget. Who has not done the tour of europe or worked in the bars of Australia.

    'showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope' Ah. You mean like students with a thirst for knowledge. Thats why they are students Doh!

    'keeping unusual work hours' Sound like every student I have ever known.

    'unreported contacts with foreign nationals' Like other students, or other universities around the work etc you mean? And who are you supposed to report this to anyway?

    'attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know' Like - again- every student I have ever known. What's with this 'need to know' anyway. They are not student at a high security defence establishment. They are at a learning establishment where you are supposed to broarden your horizons beyond the coursework you are set.

    'unexplained absences' What like road trips, surfing tours and falling in love.

    1. Re:How are they going to tell? by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >'failing to report overseas travel' Um. Is not that the ultimate part of the freedome of being a student. Overseas travel on a budget. >Who has not done the tour of europe or worked in the bars of Australia.

      Bribing customs to not stamp your passport? Somehow having the influence that they comply?

      Anyway, the school administrators that will comply with this kind of request and the ones that will tell the federal bureaucrats to stick it, are the same ones, before and after that memo anyway. Changes nothing.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  114. Looking in the wrong direction, Try China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over the past few years, there have been reports of computer break in's at the state department and other places. China has much to gain from learning national security secrets. Either for increasing edges for their growing market, or for military secrets.

  115. J. Edgar Hoover rises from the grave? by rts008 · · Score: 1

    WTF?!?!

    Half or more of that list describes common activities of all college students, not just foreign students.

    Anymore, the crap going on in this country is like a bad McCarthy era flashback, with old J. Edgar running the FBI again.

    This current administration seems to be unable to learn from history, and completely lacks common sense.

    Boston Harbor is looking more like a teapot again every day. (and before some pedant tries to point out that taxation without representation was the hot issue then, look at yesterday's articles here-hint: Gov't. going back to taxing virtual goods in online games)

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  116. Debunking every... by freedom_india · · Score: 1

    Unexplained affluence = Many possibilities; some esoteric ones: I would have sold my forehead on ebay for advertising, sold my pack of 1950s archie comics for a good price, scrounged some more money from my parents, working at a McJob (ok, that's not good , but hey $50 is a LOT of money).

    failing to report overseas travel= Especially if am going on something like on EuroTrip and making out with my..., Driving to mexico to enjoy corona at Point of Manufacture, Drinking so bad that i end up in Canada.

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope = Yup. Very true. Especially if there are hot chicks in Anthropology or Investment Banking classes...

    keeping unusual work hours = HEY ! Am 19. OK?? I wake up at noon after a night of binge drinking.

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals = Yup, the czech chick contact nos WILL need to be pried from my cold dead hands, especially since she thinks am the only one for her.

    unreported contact with foreign government = Ya, its her dad's henchmen who paid me a "polite" visit to tell me she has a fiancee in Czech republic and her dad BTW is a FieldMarshall.

    military, or intelligence officials = Ya, like i said earlier her dad was a fieldmarshall, i always wondered how could a beast like that spawn a beauty like her. I made the mistake of blurting it out to his henchmen and...

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know = WHAT??? Attending anthropology classes to meet up with the chick is now prohibited?

    unexplained absences == Oh Yeeaahhhh !!! I likeed that one...

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  117. Welcome to USSR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you don't even get free education and health care with that. Hehehehehehehe :)

  118. "Your Role in Combating the Insider Threat " by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) Counterintelligence and Security Activity (DAC) recently produced a guide to help its members understand their responsibilities for reporting suitability issues and potential espionage indicators that may surface in a colleague's behavior"

    http://www.ncix.gov/archives/docs/Your_Role_in_Com bating_the_Insider_Threat.pdf

    Gee, what's chilling or McCarthyist about that?

    Oh, wait: everything. . .

  119. The problem. . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . is that you can't apply DIA-type scrutiny to academia. It's just absurd, and achieves nothing.

  120. Re:Deceptive headline designed to distort the trut by Cosmic+AC · · Score: 1

    it remains implicit in the issuance of such "guidelines" that if the behaviors described are observed, action should follow I don't believe it does. The guidelines, by explicitly advising people who are suspicious of a colleague's behavior to report it to the proper government authorities, and encouraging them to help those that are displaying early warning signs, does not leave an open-ended suggestion of "you know what to do, *wink-wink nudge-nudge* and you have our permission to do it". There will always be those school administrators who abuse their power, but this is not caused by an 11-page set of FBI guidelines. Do you not think it worthwhile to catch spies? When would the benefits of following these guidelines outweigh the oh-so-egregious-human-rights-violations in your view?

    If the FBI is really interested in stopping Terror and protecting State Secrets, they should, perhaps raid the Skull'n'Bones frat house... I'm sure the tribes would like to get Geronimo's skull back Wow. Listen to coast to coast much, do you? There is no evidence that S&B has Geronimo's skull.
  121. This is nothing new by FredThompson · · Score: 1

    This is nothing new. There are 2 ways to deal with crime/war: response and prevention.

    A little simple research will show plenty of times when this has happened in the past. One very good example was the American-born student who pursued how to construct a nuclear device. Most decent public libraries will probably have the condensed version of the story in Reader's Digest back issues. This student did things like call DuPont and explain how he needed to make a controlled explosive blanket to compress a sphere on all sides with a specified amount of force. The DuPont folks told him which products and how to do it. There were a lot of other things like this. At the time, such information was not restricted and the Feds calmped down hard to change that situation.

    Similar things have happened with gene-splitting and mutation of biological materials (The book Demon in the Freezer gives some good detail.)

    Backbone infrastructure information has been classified or re-classified and removed from public dissemination because of its potential for high ROI (for lack of a better term) for sabotage.

    This program looks like codification and methodology to better find out questionable activities.

    Certainly, there is a point where interest in civil engineering is different from intelligence gathering to case a facility for future attack. At what point do all the factors indicate plausible danger? That's hard to say. Things like the prohibition of photography of federal buildings (which includes all Post Offices) seem quite excessive but it's probably a lot easier to make a simple rule than trying to harden every conceivable weakness and turn everyone into anti-terrorist specialists.

    The first thing this news brought to my mind was how such a method would have been beneficial when a bunch of foreign flight students wanted instruction on flying, but not landing, jumbo jets.

    This program doesn't look that much different than posters I saw in college that said something like "There are 100 sets of eyes for the campus police and 35,000 students. We can't be everywhere to protect everyone all the time. Report suspicious activity."

    The goal is to catch sabotage/terrorism in the planning stage. There isn't a "smoking gun" at that point. Guns only smoke after they're fired.

    Hmmm...smoking guns...kind of makes you think of Virginia Tech, too, doesn't it? There wasn't a proper environment to report and remove Hu, even though he was a dangerous lunatic and this was well known for a long time before he went on his shooting spree.

  122. Hitler was a Conservative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, this is hardly surprising. Conservatives are poisoning every single aspect of our government: the military, the federal agencies, freedom of speech, etc.

    When you vote in people with ties to Nazis (Prescott Bush), Al Qaeda (GW Bush), South American death squads (John Negroponte and Otto Reich), and Nixon (just about everyone else in the White House), it seems kind of silly that people would be surprised the US government starts taking on a fascist flavor.

    Anyone read about how Iraq is #2 on the worst countries on the planet? Even Somalia has their shit together more than Iraq. Again... government by NeoCons means disaster.

  123. Just remember those immortal words... by bratwiz · · Score: 1


    Just remember those immortal words spoken in the wake of 9/11 by none other than our fearless leader (and everybody else goose-stepping along)-- if we change the way our nation works, if we give into our fears and give up our freedoms, the Terrorists have won.

    Welcome to the end of days, the new world order, Annuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum, the time when men must speak the name of the beast or wear his number in order to conduct business and to buy or sell.

    The war in Afghanistan and Iraq have been going on for over five years now-- longer if you start counting from the first Gulf War. The weapons of mass destruction-- I mean, "the struggle between good and evil"-- er, ridding Iraq of Al Quaeda operatives-- uh, "confronting the terrorists in Iraq so we don't have to face them here at home"-- oops, I mean "liberating Iraq from the brutal dictactor Saddam Hussein"-- I mean (this is getting embarrassing) "for the oil", by which I really meant to say "bringing democracy to the middle east", uh-- how about "Remember the Maine???"

    Somebody remind me, how long has it been since we "WON" the war? And if we "WON" it, why are we still there and taking casualities?

    What is it about having all these NEFARIOUS ENEMIES that keep shifting to meet the administration's need du jur smells sickly like a cross between Orwell's "1984" and pre-nazi germany? All we need is a fire in the Reichtag-- er, Capitol building for the scene to be complete.

    And I thought Osama, the guy who actually attacked us (supposedly) was in Pakistan anyway? What good is it to have all those fancy satellites and global hawks if they can't actually find the guy we're looking for??? Apparently they can spot everybody else (look up and wave for the camera!)

    We've become increasingly adept at finding US CITIZENS IN THE USA and discovering what US CITIZENS are doing IN THE USA and listening to US PHONE CALLS IN THE USA and working to make sure that US CITIZENS aren't up to anything funny IN THE USA-- but what about all thos other countries that actually HATE US-- the ones who are PUBLICALLY ON-RECORD MAKING DEATH THREATS??? Why can't we find THOSE guys?

    I thought the reason we were at war-- whichever reason that was-- spin the dial, pick one-- who cares-- was to PROTECT american freedoms and democracy IN THE USA by GOING AFTER THE BAD GUYS SOMEWHERE ELSE?

    And if the FBI is concerned about some group giving out good ideas to Terrorists... why don't they turn on CNN where they sit there and blab about freely all day on every possible angle, attack vector and weak point there is IN THE USA along with full-color pictures and diagrams with circles and arrows explaining all the details and Wolf Blitzer and Miles O'Brian doing the play-by-play for any idiot that didn't get it the first time around???

    And if the FBI is concerned about security, why not try securing their OWN computers IN THE USA along with those of the DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY IN THE USA that keep getting flunking grades for security-- not to mention getting hacked by every third-grader from Moscow to Beijing and everywhere in between...???

    I think these are really good questions-- for a start-- and directly on-target with this discussion. What the fuck is the FBI doing on college campuses putting the lid on public discourse that's protected by the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION-- and if NOT in a SCHOOL/UNIVERSITY SETTING-- then WHERE for gosh sakes???

    Its time people got together and told the Bush administration where to go and how many ways they can fold their scare dogma and stuff it up their righteous pompus assholes. And if anybody is wondering where to find Bush's asshole, just go to Google Maps and type in "White House" and then (take your pick): Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld (yes, I know he's retired) or any of a dozen or more NEOCONmen busy trying to hoodwink the American public and bushwhack us into giving up our rights and freedoms.

  124. Let's test these criteria. by sulimma · · Score: 1

    I spent a semester at UC Berkeley. Let's test these criteria against an average foreign student...

    > failing to report overseas travel,
    So, which governement organisation do I need to call if I want to visit my mom?

    > showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope
    In Berkeley it is mandatory to take off-topic classes, called "DeCal". I had "theory of nonviolence" and "Energy and Society" as a EE major.

    > keeping unusual work hours
    Everybody did.

    > unreported contacts with foreign nationals
    At a university with 60% foreigners both in faculty and among students? In an area with many tourists? In a state with 30% mexican residents?
    ROTFL

    > unreported contact with foreign government
    In Berekeley there even is a computer science institute funded by german government. Also, my stay in Berkeley was funded by the german government.
    The request regular reports in return.

    > contact with foreign military.
    If I get a drafting letter, does that count?

    > unexplained absences
    No more exessive partying?

  125. Thankgiving Day Prayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    thanks for a country where nobody is allowed to mind his own business
    thanks for a nation of finks


    Williams S. Burroughs, Thanksgiving Prayer

  126. I am a spy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This honestly scares me to an unnerving extent. It makes me seriously reconsider continuing my education as a Northwestern student. I am a Russian born dual citizen that falls under EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING FROM TFA. Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators.

    My father is rich...I never bother explaining it.
    I often travel overseas, birthdays, breaks, etc. I never report it "Wait, who the fuck am even supposed to report it to?"
    I'm a curious bastard on everything, you know...a GEEK?!!?
    I'm kind of an insomniac, making for some very unusual hours.
    "Unreported contacts" - you mean....FRIENDS? 'again, who the FUCK do I report them to even?'
    contact with foreign military.....let's see, my family contains some war heros...'
    'without need to know' - there's never a NEED to know anything, but I want to anyway.
    'unexplained absences' - um, yeah, I'm supposed to explain all of my movements...to WHO?!?

    SO, returning to the US to continue study may get me treated as a SPY....fucking priceless, SCREW that, at least in Soviet Russia I can bribe/buy my way out of police bullshit.

  127. Ooops.... looks like I'm a spy.. by allikat_uk · · Score: 1

    Unexplained affluence - does my secret group of chinese gold farmers count? failing to report overseas travel - Mulgore ok by the FBI or not? showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope - Sure I'm a paladin, I keep this tier 0 warlock gear for the looks, k? keeping unusual work hours - Ummm... my connection at work is better than at home, and I gotta do this raid... unreported contacts with foreign nationals - Does a YIM list that covers the planet make me a bad person? unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials - And how the heck do I know who they work for? attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know - Curiosity is a crime now? and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators. So, now I'm a spy, ok, I'll be in all morning to accept my nice new Aston Martin DB9 vantage with the Q division gadgetry. You already have my number and email address if you need to re-arrange :p

    --
    How to make a flamewar in under F characters: I love SuSE!
  128. Cancer Research on hold due to FBI concerns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets put some futurama headlines to this.

    Cure For cancer on Hold due to FBI concerns on national security.

    Oil independence placed on hold due to NSA concerns about who we are sharing our technology with.

    Genetic research on hold due to the fact we might inadvertently clone ACLU members, lawyers, Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Politicians, mob members, and judges says the FBI.

    But in reality the news in the paper of the future would read mundane news of absolutely no interest to the public at large due to national security concerns.

    Hum kind of thinking of it i have seen no news reports on...

    1 The national Energy Policy (I want a car that gets better mileage. but i do not want a bill named this that does nothing to secure our energy independence from foreign oil and does nothing to benefit our environment.)

    2 Global warming (It is misnamed and mislabeled again. it is global climate change!)

    3 Nuclear waste disposal problems (It's there and it is not going away any time soon.)

    4 All news results about nation wide wild fires from Florida to Alaska. ( If your cabin was there would you not want to know what is going on?)

    5 Any news about replacement satellites for NOAA. so our flights are safe the people of our land are too. and we should freely share that info with all our neighbors regardless of their countries leadership.

    6 Reviews about products, or developments that could help decrease the electric bills.

    PERHAPS THE FUTURE IS NOW!

  129. famous Ronald Reagan quote applies here by hoyeru · · Score: 0

    remember? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
    It all depends on what your goals are so you can use semantics to labels them accordingly.

    MOSAD, CIA, FBI, NSA, etc etc etc etc etc

    Don't wanna be attacked? Don't mess into the affairs of other countries and SOP funding ands supporting Israel. It's THAT simple.

    Opps, there goes my non existent karma, har har. Oh well maybe next life.

    --
    fuck karma, I like saying the truth better
  130. Multi-national Societies are Riddled with Spies! by Surprised · · Score: 1

    I wonder how naive, wicked and stupid our western societies are? What so called multi-national western Democratic Societies in reality are 'Multi-Intelligence' or multi-spies societies. There is no doubt what so ever that our wicked western world is heavily infested with hypocrite multi-national spies (females & males alike), especially among students, teachers, researchers, politicians, clergy, corporates, interest & religious groups. That is why our western world is being perverted and screwed upside down. Our western world is riddled with spies, bigots and hypocrites to the point where our western world is unable to distinguish between the seeds and the bran. Our western world is becoming hostages to the entire spies of the world, especially Asia and the East. They are deceptively using Democracy and religions, especially 'Christianity' to achieve their objectives and fulfil their ambitions.

    These certainly has to do with corruption and greed in our western educational institutes, corporates, religious groups, public servants and politicians. It is almost impossible to eliminate it for good.

  131. Mostly agree - except for "communist country" by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    If China still was a communist country in the traditional sense, they would not be much of an economic threat. IMHO, the inefficiency of the central planning bureaucracy was the downfall of the USSR in the cold war.
    The Chinese have recognized that and allow their companies a lot more freedom. In effect, they still have a one-party dictatorship but with a semi-capitalist economy.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  132. Boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The military does this every year, its called a comsec brief. I don't see any thing wrong here, it's somewhat useful information.

  133. Complete Overreation by rmitz · · Score: 1

    The document in question (did anyone actually read the document that the blog refers to, not just the blog itself...or maybe even that much is charitable) clearly applies to those who have security clearances. And while it is a little bit excessive, it is not entirely inappropriate in that case to mention a word of concern to the person in question's security officer.

    There are lots of people who don't meet these requirements (myself included) and don't get a security clearance; or at least not much of one.

  134. Another knee-jerk left-wing /. article headline by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    How is giving a talk about how to spot possible espionage in any way the same thing as "restricting university student freedom?"

  135. Zeig Heil........ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Freedom is verboten. ignorance is strength. Be a good little Nazi or we will
    end you to a place where huge men ride your ass all day and night....

      Might as well get a head start on the future of this country.

  136. A witchhunt by xmedar · · Score: 1
    Unexplained affluence
    from Halliburton shares, short positions on oil, etc, check

    failing to report overseas travel
    to that cool hacker conference, and report to whom? check

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope
    polymath, check

    keeping unusual work hours
    being an average geek with a large supply of caffeine, check

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials
    aka posting on /., check

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know
    being a curious, hacker type, check

    unexplained absences
    on protests, the result of long nights out, and general student youthfulness, check

    are all considered potential espionage indicators

    /.ers you are all under arrest for espionage, Mr. McCarthy will be allong to question you shortly...

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced man is indistinguishable from God
  137. You want to know how it started? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    It started when the US and UK decided to set up a new state for the Jews in Palestine.

    Before that, no Arabs cared much about what the West was doing. After that, they were pissed off that their land had been taken, and given to a people who were a self-professed enemy of Islam. So they attacked Israel. And the US defended it.

    And it all went downhill from there.

    But that was where it started.

    1. Re:You want to know how it started? by rben · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It started because of oil. Oil is a strategically and economically vital resource for the U.S. It has been since before Israel was set up, and probably has a lot to do with the creation of that country, since it gave the U.S. a friendly presence in an oil rich region.

      Oil is what fuels the repressive governments in the Middle East. If they didn't have oil, the U.S. wouldn't care about them and wouldn't prop up governments that abuse their people. Those oppressive regimes create plenty of unhappy people, who turn to religion for answers as to why their life has to suck so much. They follow anyone who can give them hope for a better future.

      Fundamentalism works the same over there as it does here, it preys mostly on the poor and disenfranchised, the people who feel they have no power of their own and want to belong to something greater than themselves. They join, feel a sense of belonging and community, and become willing to do whatever they are asked. Just like the cults here, those fundamentalist sects are run by charismatic individuals. These guys have no regard for the lives of their followers. They offer up the U.S. and the rest of the West as the reason for all the woes of these poor people, and why shouldn't these people believe them? They have very limited sources of information and often have very little education.

      The ones who are educated see the U.S. as an interfering power that cares more about the oil than about the people who live on the land. Our actions, as a nation, just reinforce that notion.

      If you want to end terrorism, end our dependence on oil. Push your representatives to support alternative energy, preferably the non-global warming kind. That is the only way to turn off the money supply to those governments. Do that, and those governments will eventually fall. What rises in their place will depend on how well we can repair the terrible damage Bush has done to our reputation.

      Lets all hope we get wiser heads in our government soon.

      --

      -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
      www.ra

    2. Re:You want to know how it started? by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      Well really it started when Turks blew the first colonization of the middle east (in modern times), followed by the French and British blowing the second colonization. The founding of Isreal, and allowing the zionists carte blanch in seizing whatever lands they wanted just dumped oil-wells worth of fuel on the fire.

      Now the people in the middle east (understandably) see the US poised to blow the third colonization, and are not prepared to let it happen without a fight.

    3. Re:You want to know how it started? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Support for the state of Israel (by certain far-right nutjobs) is also religious in origin. The eschatology views of some flavors of Christianity view the Second Coming of Christ as something to work towards and hopefully usher into occurring during their lifetimes. A necessary step in the plan is getting all the Jews in Israel, and that's pretty hard without an Israel. That's why you see asshats like Jerry Falwell who hate everyone but weirdly has a hard-on for the jews (apparently) because of his strong support for Israel. Not really, he couldn't care less about the jews (aside from him being dead at the moment)... they killed Jesus, remember.

  138. Back in the USSR.. by Puchku · · Score: 1

    I'm a neutral third party, with no anti-Bush or pro-liberal bias. That said, I've been noticing for a while now that the US seems to be getting slightly paranoid. The whole Patriot Act, Homeland Security, TSA and all that aside, even in their international dealings, they seem to be getting very insular and closed off. This latest article sounds eerily like what happens in non-democratic states. In the former USSR, in China, in pretty much any dictatorship, you live under a cloud of fear, suspicion and paranoia. The irony is, in these countries it's getting better, in the US, it seems to be getting worse.

    I read about the Indians getting killed just cause they wore turbans, the travails of travellers, and in the UK, a Brazillian kid getting shot in the head cause he was running to catch a train, and other incidents like these.

    I wonder where it's all headed. If we logically extrapolate, where do we end up?

    It seems like we are going through a transitional phase; similar things happened when society transitioned from a monarchical system to a system of self-government, and before that when feudalism gave way to monarchy. Colonialism gave way to independent states, and the protectionist theory gave way to the GATT and free trade. (which is in trouble again..)

    So what comes next?!

  139. Time to Dismantle the FBI by flyneye · · Score: 1

    I see they've outlived their usefulness.
    When adults paying for an expensive education are targeted to lose freedom because of that fact,its time to collect the shields and guns and give the boys in blue brooms or something about their speed.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  140. What we are teaching them by p2ranger · · Score: 1

    I was an engineering student at Mississippi State University. It is common knowledge in the school of engineering there that two of the guys in charge of Iraq's Chemical weapons production got their Chemical Engineering degree from my school. MSU likes to list their graduates who have made accomplishments to recruit students, but they don't tend to put this on the list. Ooops. Maybe there is something to restricting foriegn students. They aren't Americans so why should they be able to enjoy our freedoms?

    Liberals like to complain that we are losing our freedoms because of Republicans and all of their medeling in "Homeland Security" laws. Well, something must be working because there haven't been any more planes crashing into buildings, bombs being set off, or any significant foreign terroist acts happening in country since then.

    And liberals want to get the troops out of Iraq. Great, lets show terrorists that we are quiters and that their tactics work. If Iraq is so unimportant, why is it that they are fighting like hell to get us out of there. That and it keeps them busy blowing up stuff not in our country.

  141. It's worth it. by moxley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There have already been great points made about this -

    But I will say this - the more we allow authorities to destroy our quality of life over fears of terrorism, the less our country is worthy of such 'protection.' If all of our freedoms are gone, what do we have left that is worth protecting; what remains that makes America so great? Don't get me wrong, I love my country, that is why everytime the government says that they are doing something that goes against our very principles to protect us I am suspicious and disgusted.

    It is a fact of life that you could die or be killed at any time. It is just a fact, it doesn't matter how much money you have, who you are, or where you live. 20 year olds can have heart attacks, a meteor impact could hit the planet and start the cycle of life all over again from the beginning. Someone could go nuts and kill you - such is the price of living in freedom.

    Besides, this government is way too corrupt and self preserving to truly protect this country and it's people, even if that is what they are truly trying to do on some level.

    It's worth it. I would rather live in freedom then take up space in a police state.

  142. Those are NOT reasons by mangu · · Score: 1
    saying that there is no reason is also silly--the people doing the attacking have plenty of reasons.


    According to "The Looming Tower", as you also mention in your post, the mere presence of non-Muslims in the Arab peninsula is considered reason for terrorist attacks.


    Well, let's do this "reasoning" again. The sacred city of Catholicism is Rome, in the Italian peninsula. There are plenty of non-Christians in Italy. Is that reason for a Catholic to declare Holy War against the rest of the world? Let's get one thing straight: the fact that a lunatic person calls "reason" a random assortment of facts do not make it rational.


    American troops were sent to the Arab peninsula to fight an Arab dictator, Saddam Hussein, who was committing genocide with the help of the Soviet Union. That was a perfectly legal reason for their presence there, they had been invited by the government of Saudi Arabia. The US in 1991 even restrained from toppling Saddam, at the request of the Saudi government who was afraid that Iran would become too powerful without Saddam. If this was a well conducted sequence of events or not is debatable, but it certainly cannot be considered a "reason" for terrorism, because there's no rational justification for terror.


    had we never interfered in the middle east, never supported cruel dictators, and never sent troops over there, things might be different.


    Or maybe not. A large part of the Middle East current situation was defined exactly forty years ago this month, when Egypt, Jordan, and Syria tried and failed to do what Ahmedinejad still proposes to do today. Until the day when the moderate Arabs and Muslims clearly reject the proposals of the terrorists, it will always be the same. The Israeli culture is vastly superior to that of their enemies because it's an advanced technological culture. A well trained soldier will always be able to defeat a horde of fanatics.

    1. Re:Those are NOT reasons by rben · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A well trained soldier will always be able to defeat a horde of fanatics.

      Rome thought so, too.

      --

      -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
      www.ra

    2. Re:Those are NOT reasons by AndersOSU · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I was with you until we got here:

      The Israeli culture is vastly superior to that of their enemies because it's an advanced technological culture. A well trained soldier will always be able to defeat a horde of fanatics.
      Really? Value judgments on a culture because of technology, and ultimately wealth?

      Besides it isn't really the Israeli "technological culture" it is mostly the US and Europe exporting arms to the Israeli army, which, incidentally, aren't available to the Arab states. I'm not trying to downplay Israel's significant accomplishments, but I'm not about to gloss over their significant mistakes.

      My take: a free Jewish state in the Arabian peninsula is a good thing, however, any state that ignores the property rights of its neighbors and ethnic undesirables is acting unjustly.
    3. Re:Those are NOT reasons by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Well, let's do this "reasoning" again. The sacred city of Catholicism is Rome, in the Italian peninsula. There are plenty of non-Christians in Italy. Is that reason for a Catholic to declare Holy War against the rest of the world? Let's get one thing straight: the fact that a lunatic person calls "reason" a random assortment of facts do not make it rational. Your reasoning (I was tempted to use scare quotes, as you did!) doesn't make sense. Jews are not allowed in Saudi Arabia, period. That's the law. This is a long cultural traditional. You can rant and rave about how it doesn't make sense all you want--I in fact agree!--it's backwards, racist, and barbaric. That doesn't change the fact that a very large number of people are fine with that. Nobody said anything about "rationality" entering the discussion, you just pulled that red herring out of nowhere.

      If Alex pushes Bob and Bob blows Alex's headoff with a shotgun, is that "rational" -- by any standard I would follow, hell no! But there is a clear cause and effect.

      American troops were sent to the Arab peninsula to fight an Arab dictator, Saddam Hussein, who was committing genocide with the help of the Soviet Union. Don't forget us! We funded him too.

      That was a perfectly legal reason for their presence there, they had been invited by the government of Saudi Arabia. So wait...now legality matters? Jews aren't allowed in Saudi Arabia as a legal matter. Ok, just so we're agreed... ??

      The US in 1991 even restrained from toppling Saddam, at the request of the Saudi government who was afraid that Iran would become too powerful without Saddam. that's one theory. I wish we had taken him out then and there, and cleaned up our trash earlier.

      If this was a well conducted sequence of events or not is debatable, but it certainly cannot be considered a "reason" for terrorism, because there's no rational justification for terror. You're applying YOUR cultural biases and understandings to the matter at hand. You can't do that--because other cultures frequently don't make sense to us!

      Or maybe not. A large part of the Middle East current situation was defined exactly forty years ago this month, when Egypt, Jordan, and Syria tried and failed to do what Ahmedinejad still proposes to do today. Yes, I'm glad you can bring up dates. Nobody MADE the united states backup Israel and become as hated as they are.

      Until the day when the moderate Arabs and Muslims clearly reject the proposals of the terrorists, it will always be the same.

      The Israeli culture is vastly superior to that of their enemies because it's an advanced technological culture. A well trained soldier will always be able to defeat a horde of fanatics. Ah yes, and now the truth comes out--the innate Israeli superiority (CULTURAL superiority!) over a "horde of fanatics." Orientalism at its fightest, people!

      we're not dealing with people who follow our cultural norms. You've illustrated quite well how you can know facts but completely understand how millions of people would react instead blathering about how they are not rational which is UTTERLY irrelevant!
  143. Shut up cunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's real easy for people like you to attack people when you're hiding behind a keyboard. Yes you, who has never done a fucking thing worthwhile is his miserable loser life.

    No one cares about your opinion until you do something with it, and no, that doesn't mean share it.

    As to the blood on people's hands, I don't see your hypocritical ass flying over to the middle east throwing yourself in front of the warring forces. Why not put your fucking money where your mouth is? Attempting to belittle people on a web board is not action. You're doing nothing, and pretending that's noble, because nothing is the sum total of your best efforts.

    I'm posting as a coward, but you're living it every day.

    1. Re:Shut up cunt by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

      OK, coward, come to NYC and I'll explain it to you in person. When will you arrive?

      I'll make you understand that flying in front of the warring forces is exactly what's keeping our part of their civil war going.

      Stupid fucking bitch is a parody of their own stupid comment about bravery behind a keyboard, without even a userID's worth of courage.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Shut up cunt by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm in NYC. City Hall. Worth St. My brother is in the Army, in Iraq right now doing a job that he doesn't even want to be doing, but he does it. It takes a *real* man to do a dirty job that no one else wants to do, including the person doing it. Just because those men and weoman are over there doing what they do doesn't mean they agree with it. Your comments clearly show that you have *no* clue about the average Soldier's, Marine's, Airman's or Sailor's outlook on life. While it may be true that some of them are of the "KILL KILL KILL" ilk, the vast majority just want it to be over so they can come home to their family. So, until you risk your life on a daily basis for people like yourself, who spit on those that step in front of a bullet aimed at you, shut your fucking mouth. Your ignorance is embarrassing us.

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    3. Re:Shut up cunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > So, until you risk your life on a daily basis for people like yourself, who spit on those that step in front of a
      > bullet aimed at you, shut your fucking mouth.

      Self-censorship was big around 2002-2004. But that is now gradually disappearing - we no longer must swear "i support the troops" with every tenth sentence. And "do it for the troops" no longer has the mystical powers of persuasion that it did a few years ago (much like "do it for the children"). Some of this is due to Abu Grahb, some due to the gradual realization by most of this country that they've been had.

      Whatever the case - having spent years in the marine corps - I'm not looking for anyone to protect me and my family by fighting in Iraq, thank you very much. I'd much rather them protect me by ceasing to aid in terrorist recruiting and training with the US's dumb-ass invasion.

      In other words, you can stick your effort to manipulate people with the troops-line up your ass.

    4. Re:Shut up cunt by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      Thank you Mr. Anonymous, but that wasn't meant to be a "I support the troops no matter what statement" but a "these people are doing a job that you (not *YOU* personally) do not have the balls to do, yet criticize them for doing it" statement. That is to say, I'm not saying fighting in Iraq is saving your or anyone's family from anything, but is a consequence of joining the military. You could join and find yourself defending against an invading enemy or end up being the invading enemy. One never knows. I don't subscribe to that "My country, right or wrong" nonsense.

      "My country, right or wrong' is a thing no patriot would ever think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober." -- GK Chesterton

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    5. Re:Shut up cunt by NEW22 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am a little confused by comments like yours. On one hand you say your brother is doing a job he doesn't want to do, yet he does it anyways, duty, willing to do the tough things, etc. You also say that just because those men and women are over there doesn't mean they agree with it.

      At the end of your comment you say that these people are risking their lives one a daily basis for people like us (non-military types), ready to "step in front of a bullet aimed at you".

      I believe that many soldiers are willing to give it all to protect America and Americans, but being a soldier does not automatically mean you are doing so. In the end, whatever a soldier feels, he is at the call of the President. You can obey every order, and sacrifice your life, and yet hurt America. Take these people you mention in your post who are over there, yet don't agree with it. They don't agree with the war, yet continue to fight, because in the end a soldier executes orders, and that duty takes precedence over any personal moral stance they may have.

      That is one sacrifice I am happy to say I am unwilling to make.

    6. Re:Shut up cunt by vuffi_raa · · Score: 1

      it is great and all to be proud of your brother, but I have had 5 friends here that were in the "backdoor draft" of the national guard and reserves, 1 of them has come back ok, 1 of them is dead and the others have all come back totally screwed up. The argument that people make isn't that soldiers are stupid or butchers or what have you-
      the argument is really: what are we really trying to accomplish for this country and is it worth killing and dying for and is any of this worth the hurt that it is doing to our country economically and militarily
      I think that you will find that most people don't see that there is anything accomplished and that it is stretching ourselves thin in our actual defenses at home from both terrorism and natural disasters. You will also find, that as I believe the war is doing nothing but working to serve the self interests of a few people who are willing to destroy and throw away the lives of hundreds of thousands of people (both americans and iraqis).

    7. Re:Shut up cunt by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      And that's fine, that sacrifice for some people and not for others. My gripe isn't with people that aren't willing to make that sacrifice, it's with people who unthinkingly attack the people who do.

      Also, the first part of your comment confuses me. Which part of my statements are contradictory?

      Anyway, that's my point really. They may join the military never knowing whether they'll go to war, with whom they'll be at war with and what their capacity will be in that conflict, but they do it because they swore they would. There are plenty of people who leave the military because they don't agree with what is being done, and I have a lot of respect for those people, too. As I said before, my problem is with people who berate anyone serving in the military, especially those who don't understand that it is, more or less, just a job. There aren't very many people in the military who *want* to go out and fight.

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    8. Re:Shut up cunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Thank you Mr. Anonymous, but that wasn't meant to be a "I support the troops no matter what statement"
      > but a "these people are doing a job that you (not *YOU* personally) do not have the balls to do, yet
      > criticize them for doing it" statement.

      Cool - but:

      1. you don't have to be in the military to point to Mai Lai, Abu Grahb, Malmady Massacre, Dresden fire bombing, Battan Death March, etc - and say that this is wrong.

      2. there are tons of people in the military with no "balls" - people there just because they had no where else to go, people who like the excitement of being on a wining side - but lack the guts to hang when the odds are tilted against them.

      3. there are tons of people in the military with "balls" - but that are nutcases. Murderers (i escorted a one to jail), homocidal maniacs (I knew one that made it to a very senior position), and one hell of a lot of evil little sadists.

      So, I think in an unjustifiable war like our invasion of iraq you really can't disallow someone not in the military to say that our foreign or military policy is bad, that military recruiting exploits young male insecurities, that our military sucks that its current role, that an occupying military tends to treat the occupied like shit - and generate terrorists. There's no reasonable basis for rejecting arguments of that type from non-military people.

      Now, if they start talking about details of military lifestyle, what it's like in the trenches, etc then they may be talking out their ass. But that's a separate matter.

    9. Re:Shut up cunt by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that we're doing any good over there, and I don't think we should have gone over there at all. If you'll read my previous posts you'll see that my problem is with people who would say that the soldiers share the same agenda as our ignorant President and his cronies. I'm merely pointing out that they are doing a job. Some agree with it and some done, but it's not as easy as handing in a resignation or not showing up for work, like we can do. If you decide to stop going to work one day, you don't end up with a federal arrest warrant issued for you.

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    10. Re:Shut up cunt by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      Now, if they start talking about details of military lifestyle, what it's like in the trenches, etc then they may be talking out their ass. But that's a separate matter. That is the matter I was referring to. I'm not saying anything about the Govt. policy or the idiocy with which it is implemented. I don't agree with it. We shouldn't be over there...we should never have gone. My problem is with berating men and women who are doing a job.
      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    11. Re:Shut up cunt by NEW22 · · Score: 1

      OK, I see what you are saying.

      Regarding what I may have seen as contradiction, it was just that it seemed on 1 hand you believed that there are soldiers who believe they are being ordered to do things that cause harm, that they disagree with, but then you mentioned the "they are over there willing to take a bullet aimed at you" thing.

      When it comes to soldiers, there is no doubt that they are in highly stressful situations and are more restricted, have less freedom to do as they please while on active duty, etc. To me it has always seemed that because of this sacrifice, publicly we make a great show of praising their honor, courage, and that they served well in protecting our country. This may sound silly, but in a way it seems similar to when someone dies, people may comfort the grieving with some statement like "Well, they are in a better place now." or "They are watching you from heaven." I am not saying that it is necessarily false to say a soldier is courageous, or that they protected the country, but that it is something you can not question in polite company. Because individuals and families have so much invested in what they are doing, as part of the military, it is an emotionally touchy area to say that you believe what they are doing in any particular instance is evil, or causing harm, and so on. I feel that the emotional touchiness around this issue stifles the sort of honest debate I'd like to see around these issues, and that it plays into the hands of pro-war people. If a soldier dies in Iraq today, and someone says "We honor what he has done to protect our country", you can't go "Well, Saddam never actually attacked us, he had no WMDs, and he was not tied to 9/11. In fact, since US soldiers have arrived, people have died by the 10s of thousands, and much of the middle east is enraged, so actually we are worse off in some ways". You'd be the asshole. Obviously, you would be if you said it right at the funeral, but even after, in any old debate, if there is ever a war widow, or family members of a fallen soldier, you can to an extent still be the asshole.

      The way we try to edge around this it seems, is to blame the President or supporters in the congress, not troops executing actions we disagree with. I agree that the President is the most responsible, but not solely. Still, personally I am not happy with the idea of people surrendering their moral decision-making and culpability over to a politician. So, from that perspective, I can not help but hold soldiers responsible for their role in enabling the President to do what he has done.

      So, rather than a contradiction, I guess it is more that I didn't feel that your statement that the soldiers were sacrificing to protect us was justified (in the case of the current conflict). I felt it was more of a rhetorical tactic that is commonly pulled out in emotion-laden debate/arguing whenever soldiers are involved. Not that that is so awful, as the top of this whole thread has plenty of internet style flame-age going on, and you are not the flamer, and I'm waltzing in as if it were calmer than it is.

  144. Normal behavious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some (most?) of the indicators sound like normal student behaviour to me.

  145. You have NO Rights: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the United Gulags of America.

    War-Mongeringly As Always,
    President George W. Bush

  146. bravo! BRAVO!! But don't expect any points by hoyeru · · Score: 1

    if I had ANY I would give you to them but heck, I dared to challenge USA role in the world and I got modded as a troll. Oh well, such is life

    --
    fuck karma, I like saying the truth better
  147. Stand up for your rights... by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I just finished Albrecht Folsing's biography of Albert Einstein. He lived through, in his life time, two major attempts to suppress academic freedoms. The first was in Germany in the decade leading up to World War II. The second was many years later, while he was at Princeton, during the McCarthy era. He also saw, pre WW I, how german intellectuals got swept up in patriotic fervor, which he refused to do. He spoke out each time.

    Which gets me thinking about our own individual roles in safeguarding our rights. I recently turned down a job because the employement contract required would have signed over all rights to all works I produced during my employment there, regardless of when or where I worked on them, or about what they concerned. I wrote a later to HR and the hiring manager explaining my objections, and why I wasn't accepting the position.

    I never got a response, and it's quite likely they just thought I was some sort of crank. My wife, although supportive, also thought I was some sort of crank. And perhaps I am.

    But I feel very good about it because it was my chance to push back on the systematic encroachment on personal freedoms. At least two people with decision making authority have seen it come up as an issue. And I don't feel like I've sold myself short.

    It was a small stand - I can't say I wouldn't have done it differently if I was desperate for a job. But the small ways matter too - it's letting things slip away a little at a time that is the biggest threat to our freedoms.

    --
    It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
  148. In other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are alerting people against inquisitive and intellectually curious people, who are interested in material outside the scope of their classes and expected career path.

    It almost sounds like they're trying to outlaw the whole point of higher learning. Is it not supposed to be a period of intellectual discovery? Sure, I know that most people here in the US don't take that very seriously... But this is a very sad commentary on people's view of the subject.

  149. For your entertainment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [Headers from wingnut mailing list suppressed] Take a look at: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/24/17 31244 The first post is from an asshole called Zeinfeld, he is a well known anti-Bush fanatic, he was running a blog called the Bush Impeachment Countdown in 2001. Don't argue with him but if you have mod points, mod him down. Less attention he gets the better. [Defamatory statements removed] Publius [Publius might well be advised to consider that were his defamatory claims correct, Zeinfeld would have little difficulty infiltrating]

  150. Fuck you liar by dharbee · · Score: 1

    You said

    "What I will do is everything I can short of kill to stop the killing you're wallowing in."

    Which really means "I'll type furiously, while doing not a fucking thing of substance."

    Then you said

    "Standing in front of tanks in the Mideast is what's keeping us part of their civil war."

    Um, what? WE have the tanks twat. Why would WE stand in front of our own tanks and by your assertion, be extending our part in "their civil war"?

    You're a moron.

    "I look forward to you getting a clue"

    Oh the irony.

    1. Re:Fuck you liar by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

      The Mideast is a lot bigger than Iraq, stupid shit.

      That's your last free clue. Goodbye.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  151. McCarthyism -- the rerun by mmeister · · Score: 1

    Please replace all prior references of "communism" with "terrorism", "communist" with "terrorist" .

    Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
      -- George Santayana

  152. Nice try but your OWN WORDS fuck you, liar by dharbee · · Score: 1

    "Standing in front of tanks in the Mideast is what's keeping us part of their civil war."

    It sure is. Now, if you'll kindly tell me what areas exist in which WE are a part of "their civil war" we can get to the part where you got caught in a moronic argument then gave us this gem.

    "The Mideast is a lot bigger than Iraq, stupid shit."

    Then of course, because I owned you so easily, you gave us this

    "That's your last free clue. Goodbye."

    I didn't need a single clue. I knew you were a lying troll who like a coward attempts to end discussion after being shown to be an ignoramus.

    And you just proved me right. Again.

    1. Re:Nice try but your OWN WORDS fuck you, liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There really really needs to be a minimum age requirement for slashdot.

      Anyone using 'owned' in any discussion should be banned.

    2. Re:Nice try but your OWN WORDS fuck you, liar by dharbee · · Score: 1

      You just used it.

      How does it feel to get owned like that bitch Ruby did?

      By the way, you're an AC, are you really stupid enough to think anyone gives a fuck what a loser who can't even log in thinks?

      Now take your own advice and ban yourself (and I know it's you Ruby, you stupid cunt, posting AC because you said something stupid again)

  153. phd students, students working on research... by l3v1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...projects, phd students, researchers, most of them meet almost all of the criteria mentioned in the article. Let's see.

    Unexplained affluence

    Maybe a valid point, but I fail to see how this is the FBI's concern, tax dept. might be interested though.

    failing to report overseas travel

    Hmm. So, they need you to report where you travel ? Nice. I remember times in my country when you had to do this, and then they didn't allow you to travel even if you reported that you wanted to go. Moreover, you reporting your traveling wishes made you a suspect of ... well, anything you can think of.

    showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope

    Which is something I and my coworkers almost constantly do. As researchers and scientists - however funny that might sound to some people - I'd even expect my colleagues to do so.

    keeping unusual work hours

    Now come on :)) What is unusual ? Working late ? Sometimes coming in late ? Sometimes working during the weekend ? At night ? Then we're all doomed :)

    unreported contacts with foreign nationals

    Now that's something I like. I mean I shouldn't talk with my foreign acquaintances anymore ? I shouldn't get new ones ? Or I could but report them beforehand ? Rrright.

    unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials

    I might agree with this to some extent, but it is still too vaguely formulated to be trusted. The problem is, you can't trust these people that they won't use this vagueness in the formulation to turn everyone they'd like into a suspect.

    attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know

    With this I also have one problem: we're not the military here. Need-to-know is not that black and white in the real world as in the service. And not that black and white like they thought it to be during the cold war. Something that at times might be considered a security measure, might be just a full blown social hindrance later on.

    unexplained absences

    I can't even remember how many university classes I have skipped. 'Cause of work, of laziness, or 'cause I just didn't like them. Yet I managed to get two masters and a phd and I'm working, I'm paying my taxes and I consider myself a patriot. Bzzt, wrong, you missed your classes, spy scum !
     

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  154. Potential espionage? Absences? by mazanoid · · Score: 0

    And here I thought all those absences in college kids was caused by hangovers and lazyness. Now I know the truth. they're all espionigists! They're not epistimists (seeking wisdom, they're out to destroy the known society....all in exchange for some aspirin for that hangover)

    Mod me -50 troll.

  155. No Crime? by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    If there is no crime, then don't you get 100% false positives?
    --
    Rent solar power with no installation cost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

  156. freedom or security? by Danathar · · Score: 1

    All of the arguments boil down to a couple of points.

    If there continue to be no successful terrorist attacks in the USA that are known by the general public, the arguments and uproar about security measures that limit freedom and anonymity will continue to grow.

    If on the other hand we DO have a successful terrorist attack in the USA (something as simple but as effective as Lee Malvo sniping people in D.C. or IAD's on I95) then expect people to gladly give their freedoms in for security.

    Hope and pray the latter does not happen. I have every confidence that people will choose security over liberty (in general).

  157. CIA == Al Qaeda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creating the problem enables the solution. This was so with 9/11 and is so with terrorism and torture. This is why al Qaeda is blamed for all iraqi resistance these days, despite US generals telling they had no significant part not so long ago. "Al Qaeda" became part of the solution when Negroponte set foot in Iraq and took the reins. Death Squads soon appeared. Holy mosques were bombed by SAS and US special ops teams, laying the blame on al Qaeda and arabs, that set the scene for sectarian violence among population that had lived together in peace during Saddam. Divide et Impera, straight from US war criminal Negroponte's repertoire. Neocon plan for control over strategic oil resources as stated in Project for New American Century requires US to set up permanent bases in Iraq. Terrorism creates the need to stay. Directing iraqis to fighting others saves american lives and keeps them from uniting and coordinating actions against US troops.

    American intelligence services have been importing stolen cars from the US to use in alleged "suicide bombing" in Iraq.
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12 802.htm

    SAS man sets up Sunnis to take on al-Qa'eda
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2007/06/16/wirq116.xml

  158. They're capable by phorm · · Score: 1

    No, the problem is that they're capable (of meeting their own agendas) but so powerful that they're drunk on it. At that point, when it appears that nothing and nobody will stop them - despite whatever bad image they portray - they're going to keep trying for more, and caring about it less.

  159. Uh... by godzilla808 · · Score: 1

    "Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators."

    One or more of the above could be used to describe any student chosen at random. Unexplained affluence? What about the kid who drives a Ferrari, spoiled or spy? Unreported contacts with foreign nationals--does that mean that every time you speak with an exchange student, you need to report it? Keeping unusual work hours includes 99.9% of students, and many staff and faculty. The false positives will outweigh *any* potential benefit.

    I thought you had to have a college education before joining the FBI, but this idea makes it seem like no FBI agent has ever set foot on a college campus!

    --
    ...///...
  160. Should we be spending public money on this? by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    The activites of foriegn security services in the US is of interest, but when they are directed against private companies that should be including the cost of protecting their trade secrets into their business model, why would we use counter intelligence assests to help them?

    Consider clueful company A and clueless company B. A checks resumes, controls sensitive information and keeps an eye on the competition. B shares information with new hires without checking their background, doesn't know where it is in the market, and doesn't pay attention to when someone is being inapropriately prying. Is it not a market distortion to try to subsidies company B with public money for expenses that company A is already covering itself?

    It is good corporate citizenship for a non-multinational to inform security services when it suspects spying is being attempted, but it does not make a lot of sense to spend public money teaching it what it can learn on its own dime. Reports of attempted spying should be addressed with public resources since it can impinge on our cooperation with foreign intelligents services in more weighty matters. But, going beyond that does not make a lot of sense. When the foreign intelligents services manage to help out their own companies with spying, they actually weaken their domestic industry since they reduce incentives to maintain domestic intellectual capabilities. If we are always the source of innovation, then it hardly matters if drips and drops of that innovation are stolen, we will always be in the lead.
    --
    Get smart about solar power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

    1. Re:Should we be spending public money on this? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      The activites of foriegn security services in the US is of interest, but when they are directed against private companies that should be including the cost of protecting their trade secrets into their business model, why would we use counter intelligence assests to help them?

      Yes it does, because:

      1) trade secrets can involve nations developing or refining existing capabilities; which has political ramifications so policy makers need to understand what capabilities other nations are seeking or developing;

      2) intelligence operatives eek to gather a wide array of information, which could be used to carry out attacks against the US or its interests; since you cannot say with any certainty what the targets of such operatives may be it makes sense to keep as broad a spectrum of the population informed as possible so that you can thwart such attempts.

      I don't think this is a market distortion but a rational attempt by government to protect its citizens.

      As for market distortions we should avoid them but there are much bigger targets such as subsidies for various industries (ethanol, solar power, agriculture, etc.)that serve no purpose other than to maintain marginal producers in business.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:Should we be spending public money on this? by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Your point 1) I think looking into the capabilities of other countries is a normal intelligence function rather than industrial espionage. If the US were doing this and then providing trade secrets to say, Ford, then it would be different, but giving policy makers a heads up is not the same.

      And 2) I agree that for non-multinational companies, it is likely in their interest to let the government know when they think they are being spied on, but I don't see the need to train them on this when they can get it figured out themselves.

      Industrial subsidies can occur when it is in the national interest to ensure the establishment of a new industry or to protect a vital industry, as in the case of your examples, or they can happen when campaign cotributions influence policy as occurs with some older established industried. When it is in the nation's interest to completely change the market as appears to be the case in the energy market, subsidies could be a useful initial tool though I tend to think that rationing carbon would do a better job than choosing which alternative should replace it.

  161. Hope that helps you sleep at night. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats a really great rationalization for the evil you have done, but its still that - just a rationalization.

    I can understand that after what you were subjected to you MUST justify it as worthwile, at least to yourself. How else can you go on getting up in the morning and trying to get through the day? Now the thing about justifying things to yourself, is that deep down inside you know your just telling yourself stories. However its much much easier to believe those stories if you find others, or convince others to believe them too - thus the proselytizing.

    I have great respect for those who server in the armed forces, not because they will "die for their nation", but because they are willing to damn themselves for others - to commit the crimes, inflict the horrors, and murder, and follow orders to do things that hey know are wrong, for the rest of us. They are martyrs, especially the ones who survive, as they are willing to discard their morality for the "good" of others. Sometimes evil IS necessary, but we must NEVER forget that it IS EVIL. Sometimes a lesser evil, but murdering others, in uniform or not is still murder. Bombing cities is still murder, and from the view of the civilians being bombed, an act of terrorism on a scale worse that the twin towers - two buildings vs an entire CITY.

    So, remember that the work killing "bad guys" intrinsicly makes you a bad guy too. It degrades your humanity, stains your soul, and destroys the mind. There is no glory it it, no honor, nothing admirable about it, accept that you are willing to become a monster in the hope that you can reduce the number of monsters in the world - a generally losing proposition since for every monster murdered, you have increased the chance that a brother, son, daughter, father or friend will take up the mantle to help "justify" the "sacrifice" of the last to fall.

    Because waging war or becoming a soldier such a dangerous thing - not just the horrible risk of dying or being maimed, but for the person and the society willing to inflict these horrors on their children AND their enemies - it must be used sparingly and cautiously, and with utmost awareness of the cost. This also means one must be willing to accept the burden of the responsibility of making sure that your evil doesn't cause more harm.

    It is this last part where our interventions in the Middle East have fallen short. Evil was used poorly, unwisely and without regard for the cost. Those with the power to wage war bought into their own propaganda and thought they were fighting a "just" war, and confused their dreams with reality. The result is instead of one contained infection that was manageable and was slowly being treated, a metastasizing cancer has been released on a whole region infecting even more hosts, and even the nation that went in trying its drunken surgeon "cure."

    I apologize to you that you were infected. I apologize to you that your willingness to damn your soul to do "right" was wasted. I wish we had done more to prevent our leaders from acting so rashly and destroying so many lives. That is our guilt and our crime. I hope it will be the lesson that further generations take with them.

  162. MS Helps Out With This... by MicrosoftTalkingPoin · · Score: 1

    ...as they routinely hire recent immigrants for short observation periods. I worked with them for six years in the field organization and, to this day, cannot understand why a non-European immigrant would ever risk working for them. At least eighty percent of foreign-born employees hired were gone in usually six months to one year - with the occasional two year stint if further observation was necessary. While there, every aspect of their day was observed (web sites, political aspects of pages read, etc.). They are guaranteed to be presented with numerous contrived situations in their day and when the observation was done, they would be slandered and portrayed as less than loyal Americans to their former colleagues - rendering them not viable as service providers in the industry. In my onwn experience, Asians and middle-eastern employees are hit especially hard by this tactic. --Doug Hettinger

  163. University espionage has long worried the FBI by zuikaku · · Score: 1

    I can remember back in '89 or '90 the FBI rented billboards along the highway between UAH and Redstone Arsenal/Marshall Spaceflight Center which read something like "Report all suspicious activity to the FBI and Army Intelligence immediately" and gave a telephone number to call in such an event.

    UAH had many students from China and India. I remember hearing rumors that a Chinese student had tried to sneak into the rail gun lab at Marshall, but I don't know if that really happened.

    I did witness a Chinese student physically break into the Computer Science department late one night; he was promptly arrested due to the actions of the network administrator. The network admin had seen the student acting suspiciously earlier that evening and confronted him and told him to leave, which he did. The admin thought the student would come back, so he warned me to keep an eye open and he himself stayed around. Sure enough, the admin saw the student come back and called the police. I remember walking from the lab to the soda machine and seeing out of the corner of my eye a hand disappearing into the CS office and the door silently being shut. I went to find the network admin and met him following the police up the stairs. The admin later told me that he believed the student was trying to alter his grades to keep from being sent back to China. Truly an unusually exciting evening at the lab.

  164. I am doomed! by lahvak · · Score: 1

    ...keeping unusual work hours...

    On the other hand, what exactly counts as unusual work hours in academia?

    --
    AccountKiller
  165. Technically... by Khammurabi · · Score: 1

    What could be more ontopic here than the fact that the Bush administration is lawless and refuses to comply with the most basic provisions of international law? The use of torture means that every new power grab must be resisted.
    The US seems to have contracted countries not adherent to the torture provisions to extract information from the individuals they hand over into their custody. Since the CIA person who is present at these interrogations is only "observing", they are likely not in violation of the provision. And I'd also wager that any money flowing to these countries has been washed through a third party to absolve the US of any wrongdoing do to a law technicality.

    This administration does two things really well: outsourcing tasks and legal ass-hattery. They seem to be adept at doing things that are outright morally questionable while staying clear of legal boundaries. If you want to stop them and their ass-hattery, write better laws and restrict how they can route funds.

    And don't fear this administration as much as the administration that takes what they've done and improves upon it.
    1. Re:Technically... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      The US seems to have contracted countries not adherent to the torture provisions to extract information from the individuals they hand over into their custody. Since the CIA person who is present at these interrogations is only "observing", they are likely not in violation of the provision.

      The point is to prosecute the people who gave the orders. Outsourcing is not a defense in US law or under international law.

      In the case you describe the CIA official might be in a worse situation since the immunity given in the Patriot act might be upheld as constitutional in which case a CIA officer might be immune if they conducted the interogation themselves. There is no immunity for the outsourced case.

      This administration does two things really well: outsourcing tasks and legal ass-hattery.

      No, they are sloppy. In particular they are relying on the fact that there are very limited options for prosecuting malfeasance while an administration is in power. They lose all their powers in 574 days. Then its time to get medieval on their ass. I don't think that bunch of incompetents have kept track of how many crimes they have committed and so granting themselves immunity will be hard.

      BTW Cheney is actually the 13th Baron Rudigore.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  166. Iraq by Khammurabi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are numerous places on the earth where great wrongs (like state-sponsored murder and such) are committed. I'm glad that the US occasionally sends troops to try and punish these people. However, I wish the US would act more of a supporter and enabler than a freedom installer. We can not hope to facilitate a false rebellion. Either the people are ready to rise up against the evil forces lauding over them, or they are not. If they are ready our support is merely just to speed up the process. If they are not ready the process will drag out because they are unwilling to support it.

    In the end it must be the people that rise up to fight, not the US. Because eventually the US will leave, as we are not often viewed as the legitimate government of the territories we control. And without this sense of legitimacy we cannot maintain control. So in the end if the people do not rise up and fight for the government they wish to have, they will not be able to keep it and the US will not be able to maintain it for them. Because if a person does not wish to again live under a dictatorship, when given the chance they will oppose it's reinstallment tooth and nail.

    Our current occupation is fueling the Iraqi people to rise up, but they are rising against us. As such we must respect their wishes and leave (or crush them utterly). Our vision of Iraq is not what their vision of Iraq is. They may be wrong, we may know they to be wrong in this decision, but it should be their decision to make. They will probably be burned by their decision, but there is nothing that I currently see the US can do to change their minds.

    Bad things may happen from their decision, but they will learn from it. We can not help those who are now unwilling to receive our help. (And I refer to the people of Iraq, not the leaders of it.)

  167. What a coincidence... by dharbee · · Score: 1

    "His over all lack of any real information about the world is apparent from his other posts and his grammar just helps make a point that you cannot take him seriously."

    I used exactly the same criteria to dismiss you. I'm glad we agree you're both not worthy of listening to.

    By the way, douchebags like you justify flaming someone for spelling while they also misspell. Had you not been a douchebag, you'd have simply had a good chuckle at your bad luck.

    Don't bother replying, as I said, I used your own criteria to come to the correct conclusion to ignore your opinion.

  168. List of espionage indicators by AitchCay · · Score: 1

    That pretty much describes every foreign student I have met in college. Many have large sums of unexplained money because their countries spoil them for exploring the world and learning abroad. Unexplained absences? Isn't that what college is all about? since when does staying up drinking all night during the middle of the week and skipping class on Tuesday because you are hungover make you a foreign spy? This list is way to vague, and there are too many good explanations for all of those things occurring together in someone who is just your average student from a foreign power.

  169. Are they serious!? by amuro98 · · Score: 1

    "Unexplained abscences" - so, every student who skips a class due to oversleeping or another reason is now a terrorist.

    "Odd hours" - what college student DIDN'T hold odd hours?

    "Interaction with foreign nationals" - Um. I studied Japanese and Computer Science in college. The majority of my classmates, TAs and Professors weren't American. This doesn't even include all the extra-curricular work I did with various student organizations and my volunteer work as an English conversation partner.

    All I need now is a LOLCat picture saying "I is terrurist?"

  170. holy crap... by wintermute740 · · Score: 1

    ...I think I might be a terrorist. I mean, one of my best friends is a foreign national. I didn't report our friendship to the feds. And I skipped almost all of last quarter without explaining it to anyone. For the good of the country, lock me up and convince me that there are five lights!

  171. Same as KGB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the same thing that KGB did internally. Preoccupied with tracking down spies. And they never really caught any because there were none. Kind of reminds you of today's world of terrorism (If only KGB thought of using terrorism as cover instead of spies, maybe Soviet Union would still be here?)

    Anyway, if you have a chance, read the great book Spymaster by Oleg Kalugin (former, youngest KGB general). Very interesting. The parallels of what happened with Soviet Union and KGB and their drive to solidify power are extremely close to what is now happening with terrorism (US with FBI/CIA and Russia with FSB).

  172. Yes, actually. The cat does "got my tongue." by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    > 'espionage indicators': Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel,
    > showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual
    > work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with
    > foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new
    > accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered
    > potential espionage indicators."

    Too bad they didn't apply this to a certain individual in the late '60's and early '70's.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  173. The Pendulum has swung back, a little by DFDumont · · Score: 1

    The days of free access to the internet from any university are long gone. Perhaps yours is still like that, but every university I deal with has firewalls in place, uses intrusion detection on their internal networks, and requires students to load virus protection on their laptops before they can access the university network. In the strictest of senses, that is not free.
    To the point of the Article, I don't find anything 'chilling' about raising awareness. If that is what you call 'Big Brother' then perhaps you should (re-)read Orwell's "1984". What I do find chilling, however is the need for some to lambast any restrictions on anyone, anywhere for any reason as evil. Remember; Anarchy is the most free society. Do want to live there?

    Ben Franklin's statement, "Anyone willing to give up a little freedom, for a little safety deserves neither" lived in a community of Quakers and was one himself. All statements must be evaluated in the context in which they were given, not in yours.

    Let's be honest with ourselves. Students from middle eastern countries come to the US because they want to better themselves. It would not be in their best interest to disrupt the thing which they have determined is the path to a better life. Self interest (nearly) always outwieghs ideology. Not that there aren't some, but I think profiling students is an exercise in futility.

    On the other hand crying "my freedoms are being taken away" means you haven't entered society yet and don't really understand what freedoms is. Can you drive a car, get married, own a house, or have a telephone ring without someone somewhere taxing it, make you get a license or control your access?

    Freedom is the not license to do as you please.

    Freedom is the ability to affect change. If you don't like it, then change it but don't waste our colletive time with tears and drivel.

    Dennis Dumont

  174. oy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Man, I'm really starting to dislike these guys.

    2) We're supposed to report CONTACT WITH FOREIGN NATIONALS to the FBI now?
    ("Officer! I just had a date with a Canadian!")

  175. The jews did not do it by sveinungkv · · Score: 1

    the jews ... they killed Jesus, remember.

    First, it was roman soldiers that crucified Him. Secound, according to the Bible (the book that Falwell based his beliefs on), the Jews did not kill Jesus any more than everybody else did (and still do). (If limited atonement is correct, only the Christians did it) The Bible says that "...he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed."* From this it is clear that it was our sin, past, present and future, that killed Him. I should also add that He Himself choose to die in our place. The Jews did not force Him. What made Him do it was His love: "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."** (remember that He is God, compare John 1:10 and Genesis 1:1)

    * Isaiah 53:5 (quoted from King James Version (1769))
    ** Romans 5:8 (quoted from King James Version (1769))

    --
    Spelling/grammar nazis welcome (English is not my first language and I am trying to improve my spelling/grammar)
  176. Report them to the authorities. by jerunamuck · · Score: 1

    Other than "contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials", these are typical activities of anyone learning. Um, isn't that why there in University?

    Quick, someone report the FBI agents giving these briefs as suspicious individuals and a clear and present danger to Democracy.

  177. What a load of bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keeping an eye out for suspicious activity isn't restricting anyone's freedom. If a person violates the terms of their student visa, it's the responsibility of the university to notify the proper people.

  178. You're such a pathetic coward by dharbee · · Score: 1

    "Stupid fucking bitch is a parody of their own stupid comment about bravery behind a keyboard, without even a userID's worth of courage."

    Maybe, but I wasn't, yet your bitch ass ran like you were French.

    "OK, coward, come to NYC and I'll explain it to you in person. When will you arrive?"

    Give me your address. I'll be happy to show and smack the fuck out of your sorry cowardly ass.

    And why is it that losers like you always posture and say "come to where I live". That cunt drinkypoo does the same pathetic shit. How come you bitches never ask for someone else's address so you can go to them?

    Oh right, cause you're a fucking twat. You PRETEND you want a confrontation, but you know most people won't travel across country to slap you in the mouth. So you get to pretend you're hard while not risking a fucking thing. What a bitch move.

    Too bad for your punk ass I'm in Nyack. Tell me where I can go and when to be there so I can shut you the fuck up.

  179. Daniel Bernstein's Cryptography Course by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

    Back in the day, I attended the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC); Daniel Bernstein is a member of their MSCS department.

    In 1995 (IIRC), Bernstein taught a course on cryptography in which a friend of mine had enrolled. Naturally the government (I forget which agency specifically) flipped out and tried to shut him down. I believe this led to Bernstein's lawsuit against the Federal Government. Anyway, students in his class were forbidden from speaking to others about material covered in the course, were forbidden from showing their notebooks to others and also had their notebooks confiscated (okay, turned in) at the end of the semester. I believe the students also underwent background checks prior to their enrollment in the class, but I could be mistaken about that.

    I was more than a little surprised about all of the commotion. I mean, this is the United States; aren't we supposed to have academic freedom? I suppose the big concern was that foreign nationals would be taught cryptography, but again, the Constitution guarantees those freedoms.

    More information about all of this is available at Berstein's website, linked to above.

  180. terrorism can be taken with a big grain of salt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know, a government which is up to so much being able to cover up so many little things. Clinton got impeached for a blowjob while this president is still in power with so many lies. I take those things with a grain of salt, cfr. synthetic terror and other documentaries and publications I've seen of what might have happened.

    I tend to look a story at both sides; what I do know is that something awfull happened to these people and their families and if it would ever come out the government would do such thing it would cause instant outrage and havoc; so we will probably never know.

    Look at what other people have tried to do in the past, it would sure not be amazed of such.

    For all restrictions like the no-fly-list, free-speech-zones, Patriot act, all those little things which have happened to get the citizen under power of its government it needed a firestarter. The word terrorism was the result of the trigger at 911, but who could have been the rigger ? ..