Online Crime Seen as Growing Threat to Business, Politics

BobB passed us a link to a NetworkWorld article, exploring the ongoing realization in business circles of the dangers online criminals pose. The piece raises the possibility that criminal elements are gaining access to US research labs in an effort to ferret out corporate and governmental information. One institute referred to in the article states: "Economic espionage will be increasingly common as nation-states use cyber theft of data to gain economic advantage in multinational deals. The attack of choice involves targeted spear phishing with attachments, using well-researched social engineering methods to make the victim believe that an attachment comes from a trusted source." We just recently discussed possible hacker involvement in several municipal blackouts.

Comments

It has grown enourmously

[Anonymous Coward]

Esp. the harrassment of good citizens by the RIAA.

Good grief.

[Anonymous Coward]

So "they" are just no figuring this out? Good grief.

Re:Good grief.

[Walt Dismal]

Indeed good grief. I saw an article some time ago noting that some Southern California gangs were infiltrating girlfriends into various financial processing institutions to steal credit card information, banking info, and so on. Even into the DMV. So there's certainly low-level activity. At one company I worked at, a crook got a job in the accounting department and somehow stole all the HR data, and some of that was used to get credit cards. How long before serious organized crime runs multiple active efforts for this? And how many Web commerce sites do criminal background checks on IT personnel?

Re:Good grief.

[Attila Dimedici]

Indeed good grief. I saw an article some time ago noting that some Southern California gangs were infiltrating girlfriends into various financial processing institutions to steal credit card information, banking info, and so on. Even into the DMV. So there's certainly low-level activity. At one company I worked at, a crook got a job in the accounting department and somehow stole all the HR data, and some of that was used to get credit cards. How long before serious organized crime runs multiple active efforts for this? And how many Web commerce sites do criminal background checks on IT personnel? The reason that this doesn't happen to a greater extent is because people can do math. The problem is that you can't steal enough to be worth more than keeping the job. There are still some people who do it, but most people who can get jobs giving them access to that information realize that the (risk+effort)/reward ratio of stealing that information is a lot higher than the (risk+effort)/reward ratio of just being a good employee.

Re:Good grief.

[Walt Dismal]

I'm not talking about the multitude of honest workers. All it takes is one bad apple to do a lot of damage, to mix a metaphor. If a gang member steals enough data for the gang to make a lot of money using even just 500 employees' personal data, it can be far more than a low-wage job pays, and the economics are attractive to the gang. Besides, few thieves would be there long enough to collect retirement benefits. The idea in a lot of low-end crime is work as little as you can, make some easy money, then split. Many do not or cannot think far ahead to consequences. So (risk+effort)/reward ratio is not always a deterrent for them. And not all IT professionals are sane and straight arrow. I've known quite a few, thank you, who are messed up people. One kept child porn on the company server. I guess he thought that being sys admin kept him safe. Another had a drug habit. Costly, I expect, and led to illegal activity to raise money. Another peddled company data to unscrupulous competitors. I've seen enough cases that I do not believe we can trust everyone to be deterred by the same factors that keep the rest of us straight and narrow.

Re:Good grief.

[Attila Dimedici]

I wasn't talking about the honest workers either. Give it a little thought, if you were a dishonest employee, how much money would it take to be worth the effort and risk to rip off your employer? If you aren't smart enough to do a decent risk/reward analysis (I'm lumping effort in with risk, even though for many people effort is a more important part of the equation), how likely is it that you are smart enough to get away with anything. Every couple of years there is a case where someone does something like this and they get $100,000 to $500,000. They get caught and they tell the press, "It was so easy." But it wasn't so easy, they got caught. $500,000 is chump change in the US economy, so it doesn't do all that much damage. It's a real pain for the people whose info was used to get that $500,000, but for the most part even for them the negative impact is in the work it takes to contact all the different organizations involved and make sure that the record indicates that someone else actually did all that stuff.

CyberLaw(TM)

[madhuri]

Looks like we need to call in Eric Menhart to lay down the CyberLaw(TM)...

The irony of anyonimity

[unassimilatible]

Used to be, mafia guys would have no Social Security card, driver's license, or bank accounts to avoid being traced by law enforcement or the IRS. Now, I feel like having none of those things to avoid the crooks online.

Re:The irony of anyonimity

[flyingfsck]

Yup, I think it is time to move to a shack in Montana to maintain your anonymity. I heard that there is one going cheap - Una, Una Kazomething... Yeah, that's the place...

Re:The irony of anyonimity

[Aristos Mazer]

> Used to be, mafia guys would have no Social Security card,
> driver's license, or bank accounts to avoid being traced
> by law enforcement or the IRS.

Nowadays the mafia guys have multiple SS cards, drivers licenses and bank accounts -- all belonging to other people. :-)

Anonymous Fuckwad

[Dorkasaurus]

Usually I just post anonymously because I'm too lazy to register but the moron posting anonymously and spewing forth a plethora of racist bullshit forced me to register just so I could say "FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING FUCK!"

Re:Anonymous Fuckwad

[Anonymous Coward]

That's funny.

Re:Anonymous Fuckwad

[Anonymous Coward]

I find that notion very offensive. There is nothing rational about voting for Ron Paul.

Re:Anonymous Fuckwad

[Anonymous Coward]

ROFL

Re:Anonymous Fuckwad

[Anonymous Coward]

How about Thirteenth/Fourteenth/Fifteenth Amendment Humanoid? After all, it took amending the USA Constitution three times to 'recognize their humanity'.

Now having expelled this bug from our systems, let's move on.

Re:Anonymous Fuckwad

[fm6]

Please don't feed the troll.

Re:There is only one solution

[madhuri]

We need a separate internet for the Anonymous Cowards... separate the inferior & racist minds for the good of humanity...

Ironically this is a problem because ....

[blahplusplus]

... of search engines like google.

Not to mention the ease of leaking/bribing information today when combined with google, cam cell phones, etc.

Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

This is just like CIA Claims Cyber Attackers Blacked Out Cities Do you see the common thread here? Same SANS "expert", too. The guy who gave CIA props for their "disclosure". I remember when SANS was a good, technical security training and education outfit. Now they are on the Richard Clarke / Howard Schmidt CyberTerror disinformation campaign. I would doubt the spook "creds" - if you'd call 'em that - of Alan Paller. The worst theft and correlation of personal data is an ongoing effort by the state - with the telcos CA-CHING! Billing all the while. The crooks and Terra-ists are a joke in comparison. T'rists didn't "lose" several BILLION US dollars in small, unmarked bills in Iraq.

Who loses track of that kind of money? No one. Mistakes aren't made like that. Plans are. But we're supposed to be afraid of teh Internet now. Why? Cos' if we didn't have the 'net, we wouldn't know about that missing cash - or the validity of Operations MOCKINGBIRD, MKUltra, Northwoods, etc.

AirTran? This is a great outfit!

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

While by no means perfect, the folks in the government are generally attempting to carry out the law of the land, as derived from the Constitution and obfuscated by the mound of subsequent documents.
Reform, as with a really nasty codebase, is a matter of simplification.
Which, as recent attempts to improve some sacred-cow entitlements shows, is a mother of a challenge.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[OldHawk777]

Old saying; "Two coincidences indicate intention."

The flaming-feuer Bush, staff, congress, senate, CIA, FBI, NSA, TelCo, OilCo, InsureCo ... have been totally coincidental for over six years now, blatantly conspicuous, overtly obvious ... to all US Citizens ... except for the mentally/emotionally dogma-blinded sick, many intelligent marginally-literate US Citizens intentional left behind over decades, and the very respectable simple minded.

The CIA just wants a domino-theory cold-war budget. What clueless George wants is never obvious, but George's handlers Chaney, Rove ... and others were always clear as to fear-method propaganda, greed-motive, delusional-purpose, and blame the blameless or those who cannot defend themselves. The internet is a target for corrupt corporatist, politicians, and spook managers.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, while I certainly don't trust the CIA not to disinform anyone about anything where security is concerned, that doesn't mean there aren't also real criminals out there who wouldn't think twice about using online means to score corporate sized profits.

Why piddle around stealing passwords and pins from aunt tillie for a few thousand when for essentially the same work you can score a few hundred thousand from the right interested party for a good backdoor into a multinational.

Money talks.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no cybernaughts (1/2 man and 1/2 machine) walking the streets and committing crimes. No 6 millon dollar men, or bionic woman going berserk. No evil robots punching the keyboards. Hence no cyber crime.
What you have is negligent IT people designing systems where information is put at risk - because a few lazy sods want, or perceive they should have access over a public (read insecure link.

What you need, is some people doing an audit, and slapping these idiots with multi-million dollar fines for being stupid and incompetent - moreso if its critical infrastructure.
Can be fixed by naming and shaming the offenders.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

The "Government" is not any one thing - generally. Specifically, there are aspects of the US Government that actively resist and subvert the interest of the American people.

In fact the "government" is not trying to carry out the law of the land - but rather to use law as an instrument of power. The Government would abolish private, reserve currency, were it "desperately attempting, against all odds, trying to sensibly enforce the bogglingly complex and conflicted laws of the land." The argument is disingenuous.

This "Government" - including the highest courts in the judiciary - have recently held forth on the proposition, that for legal purposes, prisoners in extra-judicial detention by the military and executive agencies are not "persons". Therefore, they are not afforded Constitutional guarantees for persons. Simultaneously, the rights of corporations as 'persons" for First Amendment protections - among others - is upheld. What is wrong with this picture? If you try and rationalise this situation, you are put in the position of "the good Gerrmans". The worst are American Liberals - completely enabling the subversion of basic rights and law, through rational acceptance of evil.

Anyone who claims to have any interest in the idea of American Government, should be able to meditate deeply on the real intention of the founders of the Republic - the touchstone of which is in the Introduction and Preamble to the Declaration of Independence.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Brilliant.

Insightful mods should pile on you - even as an AnonCow!

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Anonymous Coward]

A Bank is a Person, and a Man is not. This is the law - do not break it, or subversively inform others that this is the law.

Only criminals break the law. It is criminal to examine the meaning of this.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

This "Government" - including the highest courts in the judiciary - have recently held forth on the proposition, that for legal purposes, prisoners in extra-judicial detention by the military and executive agencies are not "persons".

Therefore, they are not afforded Constitutional guarantees for persons.

Simultaneously, the rights of corporations as 'persons' for First Amendment protections - among others - is upheld.

What is wrong with this picture?

If you try and rationalise this situation, you are put in the position of "the good Gerrmans".

The worst are American Liberals - completely enabling the subversion of basic rights and law, through rational acceptance of evil.

Well, JC, that's an interesting line of argumentation, but I'm not sure that you've accurately captured the legal developments and arguments.

Nor am I competent to rehash their arguments either. I'm neither a lawyer nor schooled in the minutia of what has unfolded.

What I can offer is that the situation is a little more complex than some bumper-sticker like "Corporations are valued more highly than people".
As far as corporate personhood goes, I know nothing. Empirically, we seem to enjoy a fairly high standard of living, so perhaps corporate personhood hasn't completely sucked.
WRT the prisoners, consider that there is a hierarchy of law. International, federal, state, local. For stuff which we're full signatories, International law equals federal law. Countries have something akin to a line-item veto on treaties and conventions, and thus you have to pay particular attention to which country, treaty, and clause you mean when making an assertion about who is in breach.

The drift of globalization seems to be to scrunch everything into a single world government. The economies are increasingly tied, and treaties like the UN Law of the Sea Convention are increasingly trying to set up bodies with jurisdiction over countries.

The United States has a consistent record of protesting all provisions attempting to undermine sovereignty.

The various Geneva Conventions attempt to regulate violence between sovereign nations. The UN charter is honored more in the breach with respect to violence between sovereign nations.

Merely using the phrase "prisoners in extra-judicial detention" requires a full review. If you're going to say that the minute the US military takes prisoners of war that the prisoners somehow fall under US civil law, you are going to have an uphill battle ahead of you to prove your point. Khalid Sheik Mohammed is not a sympathetic character. Attempts to treat him even slightly like a US citizen for legal purposes leave me, and I'll daresay, practically everyone who's ever sworn "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic" completely cold. Not that I'm a fan of waterboarding. Or even capital punishment. The reason that we tend not to come out with blanket policy definitions on things like torture is not so much an endorsement of sadism, but a recognition that keeping the ROE vague avoids limitations and precedents that can grown in unforeseen directions.

Rather than corporate citizenship, precedents like Guantanamo bring the various entitlements for retirement and medical care to mind. Driven by fear, guilt, and a non-command of the context of the situation, granting everyone on the planet all available US rights, privileges and government services, irrespective of mass-murders in which they may have been involved, treaties violated, or what have you, seems a salve for the conscience of some.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

KSM was a looney, who admitted to being the man in the moon, once sufficiently tortured.

If justice as persons is not universal, it is a fiction.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

The front page again illustrates "your" Government, struggling to do the best on your behalf:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/20/1747201

"We invoke Executive Privilege to protect our PetroCo sponsors, and the globalists destroying the native industrial economy. BTW: breath smoke and like it!"

"The AP reports that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has invoked executive privilege to justify withholding information in its response to a lawsuit. The state of California is challenging the agency's decision to block their attempt to curb the emissions from new cars and trucks. In response, the EPA has delivered documents requested by the Freedom of Information Act for the discovery phase of the lawsuit -- but the documents are heavily redacted. That is, the agency has revealed that it did spend many hours meeting to discuss the issue, but refuses to divulge the details or the outcomes of the meetings. Among the examples cited, 16 pages of a 43-page Powerpoint presentation are completely blank except for the page titles. An EPA spokesperson used language similar to other recent claims of executive privilege, citing 'the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting.'"

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

If justice as persons is not universal, it is a fiction.

Sweet, sweet bumper sticker.
Beyond the theological point, in reality, the difference between this theory and practice is greater in practice than in theory.
Who gets to define symbols like 'justice', 'universal', and 'fiction' is one powerful bloke.
Would that one could set an eternal champignon such as yourself up as POTUS, just to get your reaction to the negative feedback of even the simplest acts. ;)

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

By the way, I'm not exactly a government apologist here. Concentrated government power generates bureaucratic singularities that could out-suck a black hole.
Less is more.
The chief point I want to make is that there are copious smart, dedicated individuals in the government, who, though arguably misguided, are making a sincere best effort. The task of the electorate is to have the courage to vote in some wiser leadership.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

The electorate has almost no access to information about candidates that is unmediated by corporations with a horse in the race.

The narrow palate of "electable" candidates is not produced by a process in which 'the people' are in any way involved.

"Which of these mandated monopolies do you select?" is the way it's done here.

Political parties should be abolished, and the judicial decisions that equate corporations as persons AND those that equate spending to speech should be reversed. Then you'll have a beginning. Dream on. :-)

I really dislike Ron Paul - for a number of reasons. But if elections were "free and fair", it's pretty clear he'd be the next President of the United States. But He's not been to the Bilderberger meetings. He's not a part of the CFR / Round Table cabal. He's not an agent for private banks. He'll never get as far as Ross Perot.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

Political parties should be abolished, and the judicial decisions that equate corporations as persons AND those that equate spending to speech should be reversed. Then you'll have a beginning. Dream on. :-)

Parties exist due to a requirement to aggregate power. If you haven't articulated a replacement that shows how we dispassionately aggregate power across the population, I fear that you haven't said much.
Obviously the internet provides some infrastructure, but the whole trust management question, which is central to whatever you do, is not a strictly technical question.

I really dislike Ron Paul - for a number of reasons. But if elections were "free and fair", it's pretty clear he'd be the next President of the United States. But He's not been to the Bilderberger meetings. He's not a part of the CFR / Round Table cabal. He's not an agent for private banks. He'll never get as far as Ross Perot.

I'm no' so sure. I've seen a lot of Ron Paul posters and bumper stickers and such, but some of his ideas are far out. I voted for Perot in '92, I'll admit, and I'm not certain that he would have done much more than constipate the Congress, much like the airlines were no' so regular last Summer.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[gr8scot]

If justice as persons is not universal, it is a fiction. Sweet, sweet bumper sticker. Beyond the theological point, in reality, the difference between this theory and practice is greater in practice than in theory. Who gets to define symbols like 'justice', 'universal', and 'fiction' is one powerful bloke. Would that one could set an eternal champignon such as yourself up as POTUS, just to get your reaction to the negative feedback of even the simplest acts. ;) Wouldn't a smaller & more open government, with less power to demand "openness" willy-nilly from citizens, exhibit those symptoms to a lesser degree?

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[smittyoneeach]

Is "less power to demand 'openness'" a figure of speech meaning "having diminished legal muscle to invade privacy", then, yes, I'd agree.

Re:Do You See The Common Thread Here?

[gr8scot]

Yes, that's a figure of speech I just concocted, and that's exactly what I want it to mean.

PS The preferred usage includes "willy-nilly" to emphasize that arbitrary, not valid surveillance, is the complaint.

Search engines?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Don't you mean NSA assets?

Who needs ECHELON anymore!

It boggles the imagination

[penix1]

The morons that put critical data / control on outward facing servers deserve the hosing they get. Who in their right mind thinks it is a good idea to put a power station's control on a server that is even connected to the Internet? That is just the stupidest thing I have ever read.

I am more concerned about who they give physical access to the data / hardware are. All it takes is one vengeful employee and a thumb drive to lose very sensitive data. Worse, many companies that do lose data won't report the breach unless it involves a threat of lawsuit by irate customers. Then they will report it grudgingly and then only after days or even weeks and months have passed. Plenty of time for massive damage to be done.

Wikipedia user IP talk pages, questionable content

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose I have too much time on my hands, but I've noticed within the past few days, at Wikipedia, on some of the user talk pages, pages which give an IP address rather than a username, some of the pages for some of the tor node IP addresses, whether they are real tor nodes or not I didn't investigate, have had questionable material posted, some of the information appearing to be usernames/passwords, and CC/SS information, which legal agency do I contact on the matter?

Spear Phishing?

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF is spear phishing? Journalists need to stop making shit up. It doesn't make an article "cutting edge".

Re:Spear Phishing?

[gr8scot]

Journalists need to stop making shit up. You need to stop reading it first. How will you tell me when you have?

Well, obviously ...

[Krishnoid]

Just a matter of time before online crime became a threat to the good old-fashioned kind.

National self-knowledge is necessary

[Anonymous Coward]

When governments or companies keep common data from common people, that is bad government. The data for the last four years of U.S. agricultural output is not on the Web. The reason could be that people would be greatly disgruntled were they to learn that food production growth has not kept pace with population growth.

Re:National self-knowledge is necessary

[Anonymous Coward]

Keeping common information from common people isn't just bad government, it's fascism.

poppy Cock. This is the cost of doing business

[Anonymous Coward]

These businessmen elect to run Windows. As such they make themselves prone to this kind of thing.

BTW

[Anonymous Coward]

I do know how to spell "anonymity". Please don't savage me too badly, grammar Nazis. - Unassimilatible

Re:MOD PARENT DOWN - KKKARMAWHORE

[Dorkasaurus]

If these "important discussions" were truly important you would log in at the very least. You truly are an idiot if you believe we can all agree on ANYTHING, so don't expect everyone to agree with your personal fears and hatred.

Re:MOD PARENT DOWN - KKKARMAWHORE

[Anonymous Coward]

If these "important discussions" were truly important you would log in at the very least.

True, nothing raises the tone of discussion more than presenting yourself as "Dorkasaurus".

Re:MOD PARENT DOWN - KKKARMAWHORE

[Anonymous Coward]

If these "important discussions" were truly important you would log in at the very least. What you don't realize is that she *is* logged in. All trolls have slashdot accounts, probably a dozen, in fact. But being logged in doesn't mean she can't post anonymously, as I do.

Now, faggot, why don't you go suck some more dicks?

Fixed that for you

[mandelbr0t]

Online Crime Facilitates Political, Business Growth.

Seriously, who profits from the stuff that makes the headlines? It sure isn't me; I'm only into grey-area piracy.

Re:Wikipedia user IP talk pages, questionable cont

[bky1701]

A wiki admin- a real one, not one of the many bureaucrats who's only status symbol is a "This user is an ADMIN" userbox. You could also go to to the copyright phone number, at least you'd likely get an employee... than a redshirt... http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Designated_agent

They may do nothing, but a random person on the internet isn't going to be able to do much. An admin (as I noted, a real one) for the site where it's posted is normally the best person to handle it. If not, maybe they could at least tell you what to do.

Re:There is only one solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Cmdr Taco do us all a favour get this lads ip address from the logs and send his details to the NAACP! id pay good money to watch that party oh yeah!

Define "Criminal" and "Crime"

[AndGodSed]

With all the whoohaa around hacking, phishing, cyber attacks and copyright infringement, I think it is very important to make sure when one talks about "Cyber Crime" there is a definite understanding of what exactly is being referred to.

If that is not done, dangerous grounds are set for criminalizing millions, oh wait, the RIAA is already doing that...

Re:scum

[Anonymous Coward]

Iron my sweater

More powerful organized crime

[JavaRob]

The morons that put critical data / control on outward facing servers deserve the hosing they get. [...] I am more concerned about who they give physical access to the data / hardware are. All it takes is one vengeful employee and a thumb drive to lose very sensitive data. These are both examples where there's at least something individual companies can do about it internally.

Personally, I was extremely unsettled a few years ago when the spammer powers-that-be decided they wanted BlueSecurity shut down, and a bunch of DNS servers, Tucows and 4 other hosting providers, and SixApart/LiveJournal/TypePad fell as collateral damage.

Is that not *scarier* for business? Let's see -- I'm free to conduct my business... as long as I don't step on any toes in the organized crime world. 'Cause if I do, they're shutting me down whenever they feel like it, and there's not a damned thing I (or the supposed "protection" of the law) can do about it.

And of course, no power, once it exists, goes unused for very long. I see more and more stories about botnets used for extortion -- which is a bit trickier to carry out, since it's tough to get paid without a money trail, and law enforcement has more experience dealing with that -- but it's just another example. If they just want to squelch my business, it's incredibly easy.

[Addendum: oh look... the article points to cyber espionage as #3 in the SANS institute's top 10 threats of 2008; botnets are #2]

define separation?

[commodoresloat]

separate the inferior & racist minds for the good of humanity... So you want the inferior minds in one bus and the racist minds on the other?

Gov needs to shut down the internet

[Anonymous Coward]

The internet has been an inconvenience to the gov, as it closes our open society and political system, moves to a fascist system.

See the Naomi Wolf YouTube interviews / lectures, read her book. This is one of many commentators who have finally understood that the US is now a police state. We don't yet have a crackdown on ordinary people, but the pressure on people who disagree with George Bush gets higher every year.

Democrats aren't interested in fixing this, they want to inherit.

So, expect a lot more attacks on the internet, and laws designed to 'fix the problem'.

Re:There is only one solution

[Ethanol-fueled]

Heh, sure....segregate the inferiors and the racists? Where would our elitist selves find our entertainment? In Soviet Amerika, you segregate racist?

24C3 talks

[nr1]

See also these talks:

Crouching Powerpoint, Hidden Trojan
An analysis of targeted attacks from 2005 to 2007
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2007/Fahrplan/track/Hacking/2189.en.html

Cybercrime 2.0
Storm Worm
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2007/Fahrplan/track/Hacking/2318.en.html

read this as..

[fawzma]

Online Crime Scene as Growing Threat to Business, Politics couldn't understand what I was seeing for a second there.

Your mother resembles that remark.

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, she asked me to deliver this message to you, although I don't understand it. She told me not to worry & that you would understand it:

"MOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

That is exactly why - generally - 'smitty' ...

[gr8scot]

... is correct.

The "Government" is not any one thing. I'd tell you to "think about it" but I know you already have. I'm just documenting my own lag behind you both presently.

This is where, presently, I would substantially differ with you:

What is wrong with this picture? If you try and rationalise this situation, you are put in the position of "the good Germans". The worst are American Liberals - completely enabling the subversion of basic rights and law, through rational acceptance of evil. Try this on for size:
'Left' and 'Right' both complain that the Judicial and Executive Branches do not 'uphold' their un-Constitutional wishes to curtail others' means of Pursuit of Happiness. Meanwhile, I declare victory to the doctrine of 'Separation of Powers'

I'll post an unequivocal 'up yours' or 'Megadittoez' when I think I've caught up & disagree/agree, respectively/disrespectfully, as the case maybe.

Re:That is exactly why - generally - 'smitty' ...

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Meanwhile, I declare victory to the doctrine of 'Separation of Powers' I declare victory to the distracting sideshow - so you can get your pocket picked while figuring out which moving card is the ace.

Re:That is exactly why - generally - 'smitty' ...

[gr8scot]

Nice try.

I declare victory to the distracting sideshow - so you can get your pocket picked while figuring out which moving card is the ace. They're all jokers. Get your hand out of my pocket.

Re:That is exactly why - generally - 'smitty' ...

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

;-)

p.s.: Ron Paul for the friendly face of bank/state fascism!

'Locate' Osama bin Laden with 'Divining Rods'

[gr8scot]

The morons that put critical data / control on outward facing servers deserve the hosing they get. Who in their right mind thinks it is a good idea to put a power station's control on a server that is even connected to the Internet? That is just the stupidest thing I have ever read. Second stupidest, and falling, I believe that is. Perspective matters very much when using the superlative form, dude. Some very, very stupid people have the right to vote, including you.

Shit, Ron! RON!! He's onto us!

[gr8scot]

Some guy on the Internet has totally figured out our small government fascism scheme!

Good one.

Re:Shit, Ron! RON!! He's onto us!

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

My point is that ANYONE elected to the office will be someone's favorite face on the fascist machine.

If RP could change that, he'd already be swapping stories with RFK.

Sorry, I'm new here.

[gr8scot]

Also, that is so far beyond cynical, I wasn't expecting it.

Re:Sorry, I'm new here.

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

No prob. I'm actually a realistic optimist!

Re:Sorry, I'm new here.

[gr8scot]

That is an excellent example ...

No prob. I'm actually a realistic optimist! ... of why I now only open new messages between posts. You, an optimist? From what I've seen so far, that is hilarious! I look forward to reading more of your work.