Slashdot Mirror
Hijacked Fox News Twitter Account Falsely Claims Obama Shot Dead
Frankie70 writes with word of a Twitter-account hijacking that's raised eyebrows today, supplying a link to the account in question. From the Telegraph's account: "'The Twitter account of the American Fox News Politics team was compromised and used to falsely announce the death of the U.S. president. Hackers, who identified themselves as 'The Script Kiddies' and said they shared the spirit of prominent hacking group Anonymous, used the account to write: 'BREAKING NEWS: President @BarackObama assassinated, 2 gunshot wounds have proved too much. It's a sad 4th for #america. #obamadead RIP.'"
and hackers are stymieing FNC's efforts to bring us the truth by claiming they've hacked them, when in reality they've hacked all the other news channels to remove the story.
This is your corporate account. How does this happen?
In all fairness, Fox News did claim (accidentally) that the president was dead in Afghanistan.
When some script kiddies can rattle the news world.
Bah, so shoddily written and obviously fake that's it's not even funny. Sure, hacking Fox is funny by principle, but maybe doing something more subtle?
until I see the long form death certificate....
what's the point of hacking fox news to spread disinformation? Just leave them alone and they will do it by themselves.
I can't see where the hacker begins and ends.... They've put out so much junk (as usual) it's silly.
End of Line.
I don't understand why these tweets have not yet been deleted 6-7 hours after they were posted. Does Fox News not know you can delete tweets?
I fail to see how anyone noticed. This is about as correct as Fox's other news.
Every one of these 'hacker' news stories brings us one step closer to an internet kill switch. The government knows that the riots will begin soon in the US, and they are trying to set things up to make it hard to communicate. Beware.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/04/foxnewspolitics-twitter-feed-hacked/
I would much prefer that the hackers be hunted down and have their Kill Switch flipped...with the help of an HK416.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
... is optional 2-factor authentication.
@foxnewspolitics (the account in question) only has 33k followers but other prominent accounts have many more. A quick check shows @foxnews has 3/7 million and CNN has over 2 million. The ability to spread news to millions of people NEEDS to have more than just a single password.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
no problem, we'll just attach more strings...
When content falsely attributed to LulzSec started showing up on Pastebin, and their response was essentially "it's not real unless we tweet it", I really, *really* wanted someone to crack their Twitter account. A Twitter credentials dump could lead to some some serious lulz.
Come on kids, everyone knows the only real way to get back at an evil media mogul is to broadcast him on his own channel saying that his viewers mean as much to him as a festering bowl of dog snot does. Bonus points if you get the reference.
Monstar L
Foxnews contacted the secret service who declined to comment publicly but asked them why they thought their twitter account warranted investigation by the secret service and told them to stop calling.
They cannot say with certitude if they were actually hijacked. I'm thinking Hannity got this drink on last night...
What rubber checks? That doesn't start until Aug 2, and you can think the GOP for that.
So I guess you're voting for the Republican candidate in 2012 then?
false flag!
So you're saying the government is behind these attacks?
If not, then it's NOT "false flag" - it's just being opportunistic.
False flag is a situation where you attack yourself while trying to make it look like an enemy attack.
Or you try to instigate between two enemies by attacking one of them while wearing the uniform/flag of the other enemy.
"he has proven himself to be just like the retard he replaced in most respects. reform my ass."
Well, as a foreigner there's at least one area we can be thankful you have Obama, and that's that at least Obama is just fucking your country up, in contrast, Bush managed to fuck everyone's country up between managing to drastically increase religious tension in the world and nurture policies that brought the world economy to near collapse.
I suppose you could be thankful that he at least hasn't started any new trillion dollar wars too, that's got to be something right? look at the positive side and all that? bit of a ray of sunshine there no? No okay, I guess not. Perhaps you're right.
First the tooth fairy and now this. DAM.
Tell me, Sherlock, how do I determine that I shouldn't read a post?
Up yours.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
"You may have heard of recent incidents involving compromised accounts on major Web sites, including Twitter. To strengthen the integrity of our systems and accounts and ensure compliance with Federal cybersecurity laws and recommendations, we at Twitter are now instituting a stronger authentication system. In order to continue posting after 11:59:59 PM 2011-07-04, we require your full name, address, Social Security Number (SSN), Date of Birth (DOB), and valid US credit card information. Click Here to verify and secure your account.
We hope you continue to use Twitter.
--The Management"
Insert logo, sidebars, random tips about hashtag and @ usage, and cute birdies as needed.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
it is a major headline and an opportunity for the childlike masses to stroke themselves into a frenzy of Fox bashing and demonizing
Those of us who actually read the headline for this slashdot article noticed it started with "hijacked fox news twitter account". If slashdot was actually looking to make fox news look bad, they would have chosen a less-friendly headline. Both news outlets are on the payroll of newsmax.com/townhall.com.
Palin
Is not officially running for anything right now. We just know she loves being in front of a camera.
Bachmann
Is running, but writes her own jokes.
Trump
Has already dropped out of the running.
unclever anti-fox KOS memes.
Do you honestly believe that the daily Kos is the only website ever to make a joke at fox news's expense?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
100% Correct.
When in doubt just spend and borrow more.
Whatever you do. Never spend less.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
The religious tensions I am sure had nothing to do with the fact that they came over here and fucking killed us.
Of course if only we were not westernized and prosperous then they would love us. Right?
I do not like people that have simple minds. They are easily swayed by emotions at first then can never be moved my fact again.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
... by the way they expressed sadness over Obama's death.
True! Apart from that war in Libya, which will drag on for many years and cost trillions of dollars and God knows how many human lives, you are surely right.
But Obama has better PR than Bush, the United Nations approved everything, and the coalition of the willing includes France this time! So Libya is completely different to Iraq. Completely, totally different. No similarity at all. No chance of creating an Iraq-style permanent war zone, and zero ethical problems with interfering in another country's civil war. Yeah, totally different. Totally.
With Bush, war was war. With Obama, war is peace.
They probably believed it because it came from Fox News.
Why would someone "hack" a Fox news twitter account and promptly announce something that the followers of that account would cheer at, or at least be mildly glad of it? Why Tweet something huge like that?
Everything about the Tweet that was sent screams immature and/or amateur, but the content of it hints at some twisted intent that no real hackers would have.
"The Script Kiddies"? Come the fuck on.
If I were going to hack a Fox Twitter account, I'd send a message that was contrary to Fox's agenda. Something like "Boehner, Cantor, McConnell found performing gay satanic ritual in Capitol basement. Nervous goats on scene, US flags burning."
Or rather, just reduce spending until the debt goes away. Whatever you do, don't raise my taxes, because the economy isn't my problem.
So since the terrorists identified themselves as Muslim, that means we should kill all the Muslims. Gotcha.
Well, OK, but since Dahmer was a member of the Church of Christ, I assume you're OK with us killing all the Christians too?
"I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
Tax revenue raises itself, when the economy grows, and is more likely to do if the economy isn't being bled by government and kept from growing. It isn't a zero-sum game. That's something that people like you will never figure out, though.
Just rely on the people in Washington. They'll fix everything.
Many Americans will think of it as voting against Obama.
It kinda sucks to be stuck standing on big-ear's coattails right now.
Do you always add shitloads of crazy stuff to the posts you comment on or is that just when you do not have a leg to stand on?
I can not really see in my post where I advocated killing all Muslims.
I do though agree that any Christian church that keeps its mouth shut when Christians do horrible things should be looked at closely and trusted not at all.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
What they should have done was announce that Fox News was officially supporting Barack Obama for re-election. Then they would have to contract it by saying that Fox News doesn't support Barak Obama for... oh wait, they already say that in every story they run.
people who did this can face some hard time for this!
It's a crime just to make a joke about killing the President and it's federal time without parole.
Because you blame the religious tensions on terrorists. The religious tensions have absolutely nothing to do with the actual 9/11 attack, and everything to do with America (as a whole, not as in every individual) started equating Muslim and Terrorist afterwards. If instead, people had been intelligent and gone "Religion is only an excuse for their actions, not the reason," and not decided that bombing the fuck out of every country the terrorists had a camp in, there wouldn't be the rise in religious tension.
So, you yourself are just as guilty as the "bomb the fuck out of everyone" crapheads in promoting religious intolerance by saying "They came and killed us and that increased religious tensions." You are laying the blame for the attacks at the foot of their religion, instead of where it belongs. On the attackers, and their POLITICAL AND MORAL ideology. Their religion may have helped form those, but to blame their religion is to also lump every Christian in with Westboro Baptist Church.
Insightful? Nice to see a mod with an agenda. This comment has nothing substantial to do with the story. Hopefully a reasonable mod will fix it with offtopic, flamebait or troll.
I just received mod points and I was torn on whether to mod a comment up for a sentiment I agree with regarding this topic, or to post myself. I don't really want to mod down those I disagree with, I would like to. but I will be satisfied if their score remained 0. I understand the diversity in political opinions, and realize people's opinions of this will cover the spectrum, myself included, however I think a lot of these opinions lack objectivity. I understand Fox is a right leaning news org, and most of their employees have opposite ideals and political leanings than that of the President, however I highly doubt that the disgusting msgs tweeted from their account originated from anyone at Fox News. It would do nothing to serve their interests, and they stand to gain nothing from this, they could only lose. Their enemies are a many, and seek to discredit them in anyway they can. Go to Media Matters website. The last time I was there, not ONE story was about anything other than Fox News, and not one was positive, nor would I expect it to be knowing the sources behind it. It stands to reason that this is a result of the ideology behind sites such as that as opposed to Fox News using their brand and power to shout out something so obviously untrue. Think about it. Even if you hate Fox, it just doesn't make sense for anyone working their to think that this would serve any agenda. If I could believe that someone at Fox did this, it is an incredible stretch to think that anyone in a management or supervisory role would think this was a good idea. The most likely offense they are guilty of in this situation, is having a weak password protecting their twitter account. Of course I can't say with certitude who is responsible for this, but this stinks of opposition tactics, and it's not even well done. I am disappointed in many of the comments I am seeing here, but I will save my mod points for comments more worthy of them.
the religious tensions i'm sure have nothing to do with the fact that your government convinced the taliban to fight a proxy war against the USSR, then after the commies went back home, you just left them with the country in ruins, the economy colapsed and not even a "thank you" note.
oh, the inconditional support to israel's near genocidal policies have nothing to do with it either.
you know, there's only so much bullying and lying you can get away with before someone slams an airplane or three in your buildings.
What ? Me, worry ?
No you just use all the money for tax expenditures so that when it comes to social programs there's none left.
Not only are we supposed to give you weapons and training to defeat those who have invaded your country but it is also our responsibility to build your country?
Well my guess is you just need to hate and that is your excuse.
Pretty bad one though.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Till government got involved charity did a much better job at "Social Programs" than the government ever has.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Tax revenue raises itself, when the economy grows, and is more likely to do if the economy isn't being bled by government and kept from growing.
All the money that comes into the government goes out again, usually into economic circulation. So while it's in the interests of the economy to cut taxes on economic activity, it's also worth taxing money that would otherwise be taken out of circulation. And yet it's tax cuts on the income of the rich (which contributes far less to economic activity than that of the poor) which the republicans are most strongly advocating.
I am trolling
I think you are posting on the wrong forum. This site, through the surprisingly effective moderation system, leans heavily toward rational analysis when compared to most.
While there is a significant bias in favor of a fairly strict interpretation of the Bill of Rights (though at times the second gets shorter shrift than I might prefer) on this site, that is a bias that would serve my nation (and, I believe, most nations) quite well. And it may be that the offenses to the first and fourth have been most heavily observed to come from the side of the aisle you seem to prefer (at least until Obama took that ball and ran with it). But your post seems targeted at forums which play host to leftists. Certainly the amount of rational disdain that this forum focuses on the left-oriented oligarchs in the health care, law, and copyright industries should be more than adequate evidence of the lack of partisan line-toe-ing here.
Save your implications of dupery for people who do not engage in critical thinking. Your attempt to induce stigma-based inhibition to identifying and publishing cases of media bias and politicians who generate more heat than light are neither warranted nor productive in this place.
If you must pander to one side, do it by pointing out factual errors or examples of emotionalism on the side you do not like. Engage in creative destruction by rational deconstruction; leave your emotionalist inhibition mongering at home.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Except the rich have to do something with their money, usually putting it in a bank, or investing it, which is used to fund loans to other businesses or individuals, which generates jobs or allows people to get mortgages.
Rich people are not Scrooge McDuck, they don't build a massive vault and just hoard all their money. If they actually did that, the effective amount of money in circulation would decrease, and the spending power would increase. The way to misallocate resources in the economy is to pay people to do things they shouldn't be doing, like overly high unemployment benefit, fraudulent disability benefits, useless jobs, or excessive numbers of prison places.
Money the government spends on things people wouldn't buy on their own (agricultural subsidies, bank bailouts) create inefficiency in the economy and slow growth.
Guilty of nothing other than being a mouthbreathing redneck jackass. . .
Your post reads just like the asshole rants we heard in the 30's. "Well that darkie who cleans my house is OK but the rest of them blacks oughta be strung up."
Your bigoted idiot rants, as well as your sigline, show you for what you are - nothing more than a small-minded KKK aspirant.
"I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
Ah, yes, in funding Catholic parishes to care for children in utter safety, the Salvation Army to provide equally for straight people and GLBT people, and for missionary organizations to civilize the heathen hordes. Right. Based on your sig, you're none too enthusiastic about religious causes, but the vast majority of social charities are mainly fronts for religious organizations to evangelize and push their own social agenda . Government-run social programs at least have some semblance of accountability to society at large. At the very least, your response merits a big fat [citation needed]
Terrorists use the cover of religion as a unifying idea to rationalize killing it's "enemies". The terrorists are no more religious or righteous than the extreme left wing and their progressive political dogma. Terrorists only represent a tiny portion of Muslims but they are experts at getting their message to the masses using fiery rhetoric and the liberal application of C-4. Until the moderate or non-extremist Muslims take a stand against the radicals the animosity towards Islam will continue. Muslims seem to have no problem with loudly and angrily protesting any slight, real or imagined, they feel is directed towards them. The moderate Muslims need to use this same level of passion against the terrorists amongst them if they want put an end to the violence and hatred. " Westboro Baptist Church" This group of idiots are prime examples of the freedom of speech and assembly and religion that exist in the US. Personally I am surprised someone hasn't given these guys a helping hand to expedite their journey to the promise land. Muslim lead countries actively suppress these fundamental rights amongst their citizens. The Muslim countries display little or no tolerance towards others and they have an annoying habit of bringing their intolerance with them when they immigrate to the west. They demand respect but offer none in return.
These guys could have manipulated stock prices by saying like Steve Jobs is dead.
I hear some rustling in the supplies closet.
Find me the statute which makes it a federal crime to joke about the president having been killed, and I'll find you the part of the Constitution which makes it invalid.
Why would they have the decency to delete the tweets.
100% Correct. When in doubt just spend and borrow more. Whatever you do. Never spend less.
First off, hang all the lawyers, that way the international banksters won't be able to get the best justice money can buy. Secondly, hang all the banksters. It really doesn't matter whether Obama is alive or dead since his signature is recorded by auto-sign technology.
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
That theory, while trivially true, falls down when you're borrowing at usurious rates and taxing people to fund inefficient government-enabled monopolies to inject funds into an economy with more holes in it.
You kinda missed his point. In Afghanistan, US indiscriminately armed all factions so long as they were fighting the Soviets - even the religious fanatics. When said fanatics then used the guns to overrun the rest of the country, it's not exactly surprising that some people find it mildly amusing that, 15 years later, US labels those same guys terrorists and starts a witch hunt. Doubly so when Russians are hired as consultants.
That mistake is being repeated right as we speak, by the way - US is now indiscriminately handing out weapons to Libyan rebels, a sizable chunk of which are fundamentalists (heck, al-Qaeda has officially supported them and said they have units on the ground there!).
putting it in a bank, or investing it, which is used to fund loans to other businesses or individuals, which generates jobs or allows people to get mortgages.
Rich people are not evil, but the free market is not perfect. Take a look at How Markets Fail. We've seen over the past ten years (or actually since 1980) that as the wealthy accumulate a greater and greater share of the wealth, average wages and employment figures do not improve. Also, there's no requirement that they invest or loan the money in the U.S. Whenever we given money to an investor, a lot of that money will end up overseas.
Well, firstly, wages have increased, though much of the increase is masked by tax, and secondly, rich people aren't usually rich because they stole the money, they got it because other people gave it to them of their own free will (except when the government intervened, and that's certainly wrong).
Average household incomes have been pretty stable in the US, but that's because the average number of people in a household has decreased, and not because people are earning less.
http://i.imgur.com/uwPEt.jpg
Script Kiddies wear the name as a badge of honor, while "hacker" is a epithet for criminals. Clearly the apocalypse is nigh.
Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
1) Post strange, inappropriate, or out-of-character message on your twitter account
2) Claim to get hacked
3) Admit it was actually you and it was an accident
While I am not a Fox fan, that was a pretty idiotic thing to do. Unwanted attention and visits from the g-men? Yep. You just won your prize!
Tweet anything else BUT do not be so da*ned dumb to tweet anything referencing assassination of the PoTUS.
I bet these nimrods were the same ones poking hive's when they were kids and wondering why they kept getting stung.
Fox will probably push the issue and these idiots will get jail time. Meanwhile Slastdotters will moan and groan about how unjust it was to prosecute the mental midgets.
That is just one line you do not cross.
would be President Biden.
I am not an Obama fan. In fact, I really dislike Obama, but I'd rather have him for 8 years than Joe Biden for 1.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
"If you think there are only two candidates, there WILL be only two candidates." - The zen of "Democracy".
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
What are you smoking? Open your eyes you simpleton.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say twitter itself is compromised. Recently my account was hijacked. It used a strong password and I've only logged into it twice in the past 2 years. Suddenly a few days ago my twitter account starts sending out spam. I use different passwords for every site (including twitter) so how did this happen? I strongly suspect that twitter has been cracked and that the people that did it are keeping a very low profile to avoid getting caught.
Unlike Gacy, at least Dahmer ate what he killed.
Till government got involved charity did a much better job at "Social Programs" than the government ever has.
Ah yes the good old Dickensian days.
How many journalists said US Special Forces had killed the President when they meant to say Bin Laden, then giggled about their screw up?
Were any of these professional journalists in trouble? No. Why is this news?
Only the dead have seen the end of War. - Plato
"The religious tensions I am sure had nothing to do with the fact that they came over here and fucking killed us."
Yes, and why did they do that exactly? Nothing to do with US meddling in and fucking up their country for the 20 years previous or anything was it?
The attack on Afghanistan was somewhat justified as a response to 9/11, but the attack on Iraq was wholly unjustified, coupled with Bush turning down an opportunity to work with Iran after 9/11 and instead declaring it part of the axis of evil it was these actions that turned it into a religious war. The increase in tensions between east and west has become far worse since 9/11, purely because of the way Bush handled it- the Muslim world condemned the action en-masse and rather than reaching out to them to foster understanding and a combined stance against extremism Bush attacked them, and made things a whole lot worse, he gave Al Qaeda more power and credibility than they could ever have dreamed of, he boosted the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas beyond anything they had previously by making the US a hate target which they could rally against and gain ever more support against.
Oh nevermind, you're too ignorant to understand. Your signature gives it away.
"I do not like people that have simple minds. They are easily swayed by emotions at first then can never be moved my fact again."
It's probably not healthy to talk about yourself like that, self-hate is often a sure path to suicide. It's ironic that you are the clear epitome of ignorance, yet seem to think you're smarter than other people... how very amusing.
"That mistake is being repeated right as we speak, by the way - US is now indiscriminately handing out weapons to Libyan rebels, a sizable chunk of which are fundamentalists (heck, al-Qaeda has officially supported them and said they have units on the ground there!)."
There was an amusing interview a couple of months back a BBC guy did with one of the fighters who claimed to have been an insurgent that had come over from Iraq to fight witht he Libyans, when the reporter asked him if he felt it was a bit hypocritical that he was now relying on air support from the very military from which he had actually killed US soldiers he replied along the lines of "No, Gaddaffi is a bigger infidel so it's okay".
In this context I'm not sure who are the bigger hypocrites- the US et al. or the militants themselves. They seem to be as bad as each other.
"Muslim lead countries actively suppress these fundamental rights amongst their citizens. The Muslim countries display little or no tolerance towards others and they have an annoying habit of bringing their intolerance with them when they immigrate to the west. They demand respect but offer none in return."
This is the irony of comments from people like you, you show you don't actually have any idea what you're on about.
Ignoring the fact that there are 1.3 billion muslims across the world, and many varied nations in which they are no less open than the US, some countries problems actually step from the fact they are too open.
Unlike the US, much of Pakistan is ungoverned in terms of for example, how you drive your car- there are no rules of the road, and if you have a crash you sort it out between yourselves, the law doesn't determine that. Sex with young teens isn't illegal under some jurisdictions but herein lies the problem- you surely recognise that laws governing these things in the west are actually beneficial? This is really the fallacy of the US mindset of freedom- it's a false ideal, you think you have freedom, and/or you think you want more freedom, but really some freedoms you would say no to- you wouldn't support the right to murder whoever you want without punishment, and so the question is really about where the line is drawn in terms of freedom- even your precious freedom of speech has limitations in that you can be punished for some speech.
The problem isn't muslims, or islam, it's a lack of fundamental respect and understanding of them by people like you living in your shroud of ignorance. Sure some muslims too are guilty of precisely this, but I assure you out of 1.3 billion of them, many are perfectly decent, nice, friendly, helpful people who wouldn't care too much about what you want to say or do. Many muslims particularly in those freshly liberated countries who have recently had or in the midst of revolutions still support a secular state despite their religious belief, yet in the US there is an ever strong push for it to be a religious christian state- where some muslim nations are going forward, the US is going backwards. Many people in places like Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand et al. cringed when they saw Americans celebrating over Osama's death by firing guns in the air- do you realise how similar such celebrations looked to us to the celebrations you saw in places like Iraq when a US citizens had been captured and killed and the population were firing AK-47s in the air? It was a rather creepy resemblance.
Things aren't black and white, the US shares many problems with the nations you are talking about, and herein lies the problem- you need to sort your own back yard out before you criticise others.
You mean this guy?
I don't see how it's hypocritical for him. If some infidels are willing to kill other infidels for him - inshAllah, he would be stupid not to use the opportunity. He knows full well that the end result of this will be beneficial for him (madrases and boot camps all over Libya to train more fighters for his cause), and not so much for the infidels.
"Had they given a shit about the terrorist attacks or people getting their heads cut off they would have helped a bit more and got these fuckers brought to justice much sooner."
Right, and if you hadn't entered a pointless war in Iraq seeking cheap oil such that it had absolutely nothing to do with Al Qaeda because Iraq was majority shiite and Al Qaeda was Sunni and so tend to hate each other's guts then those people wouldn't have got their heads cut off in the first place would they?
But no it's all their fault. You're obviously too young to remember 9/11 properly or something like that judging by your utter ignorance of the situation, but if you did remember it you'd remember candle light vigils in countries like Pakistan and Iran supporting the US people in their hour of distress. Of course, that didn't stop Bush attacking them or anything, which forced them onto the side of extremism because you made it quite clear you didn't want them on your side so where else were they meant to go? If your hold out your hand and offer to help someone against your enemy and they bitch slap you in the face, is it really any suprise they then go help your enemy instead? That's exactly what the US did to the muslim world.
I spent 13 years in the area so I have a pretty good idea what is going on. Comparing a lack of traffic laws against the basic right of free speech and religious tolerence is a clear sign you do not understand anything of any importance and it's ignorance such as yours that guarantees the animisioty will continue. Personally I don't give a shit what happens over there anymore and they could all drop off the world tomorrow and I doubt many would feel particulary upset about it. Until the countries in turmoil face the fact they have created their own problems and stop blaming everything on outsiders they will never know peace. Westerners who also blame outsiders for all the trouble and assign no responsibility to the people actually living in the effected countries only bolster and justify the extremists views and actions.It's past time to withdraw from these countries and let them continue to wreck their countries by themselves. As long as they stay within their borders they can do anything the want. If they step outside their boarders to promote their ideas they should be stomped on. The Taliban made this mistake and look what happened to that country. They were enforciing a barbaric rule using fear and violence but no one outside was interfering. Aligning themselves with those promoting international violence, even if they themselves did not directly participate in the violence, was their undoing.
Wow, you totally missed his point. We helped them repel an invader by giving them weapons, and you expect us to also help them rebuild. Nothing is good enough with you, why should we help them rebuild? That should fall on the soviets as they are the ones who invaded Afghanistan. Your attitude is like us helping France rebuild after WW2 because we helped them fight back against the Nazis. We may have helped, but we were not obligated to do so.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
We helped them repel an invader
What Soviets did in Afghanistan was exactly what US is now doing in Libya - they intervened in an ongoing civil war by request of one of the sides that was "ideologically close". US intervened on behalf of the other side. It wasn't Soviets fighting Afghanis - it was the army of DRA (Afghanis) backed by Soviets fighting Mujahideen (also Afghanis).
Ironically, back in the day, US was so blind in its hatred of Soviet-style socialism that it preferred Islamic fundamentalism. Which is very sad, since, while both are totalitarian, the former is at least socially progressive.
you expect us to also help them rebuild.
Nowhere did I wrote that. I expect you to not be idiots and give weapons to people who then use said weapons to establish an authoritarian theocratic regime and a country-wide terrorist training camp - which all, I must add, end up being used against you in the end.
...they'll be telling us Elvis Presley is dead. And after that, they'll probably start a death rumor about Michael Jackson.
You are so right. I forgot how the entire Muslim community stood fast and help us hunt down and destroy the terrorists.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Why is it the responsibility of a religion to hunt down and destroy criminals who claim to be a part of that religion?
Should the Christians have to form a vigilante mob every time a Lutheran robs a convenience store?
Or.. Hey, I'm just wondering, should all Christians be condemned because they haven't "stood fast and help us hunt down and destroy" the Catholic priest child molesters?
"I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
"Comparing a lack of traffic laws against the basic right of free speech and religious tolerence is a clear sign you do not understand anything of any importance and it's ignorance such as yours that guarantees the animisioty will continue. "
Calm down it's a mere example, it extends well beyond that- there are no limits to speech in these areas either, however there's few limits on how people will treat you if you say something you don't like. You obviously haven't spent 13 years there, else you'd fully understand this, yet you don't.
"Until the countries in turmoil face the fact they have created their own problems and stop blaming everything on outsiders they will never know peace."
Right, it's Afghanistans fault that as a relatively stable democracy in the 70s the Russians invaded, fucked up their country, then the US armed extremist militants, who then fucked up their country even more, and then, when the US invaded again and fucked up their country yet more again, it's all entirely their own fault. Seriously? Do you have even the slightest clue about the history of these areas?
"Aligning themselves with those promoting international violence"
I thought they aligned against the US, not with? Oh wait, you mean you believe there's only one set of aggressors in this world and the US isn't one of them? Get a grip.
" there are no limits to speech in these areas either" You must have been dropped on your head when you were a baby. This has got to be the stupidest statement I have seen all month. It's not the ability to say anything you want that defines free speech it is what happens to you after you say something. Free speech is about allowing people to voice their own ideas without being killed or imprisoned when someone disagrees. Have you heard of the blasphemy laws that utilizes execution as the punishment? How about the protesters in Syria being shot for critizing the state? The US, Britain, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan supplied Afghanistan with weapons to fight the Russians. In a normal country this type of assistance would be looked upon as something positive. Instead the people supplied with the weapons turned around and used them to suppress their own citizens and setup their own private fiefdoms using the most extreme and perverted version of Islam as the foundation of their society. Nobody ever mentions the US and Britain also supplied large amounts of humanitarian aid to refugee groups running from the violence. It was the refugee situation that first helped persuade the US to get involved in the first place. The real enabler to Afghanistan's violence and mayhem has been Pakistan in their efforts to obtain an ally in their war against India. Of course the US could be considered aggressors when it feels their interests are being harmed. I am not defending every choice made by the government or agreeing with everything the government deems a threat but I would rather have the government err on being over protective than being to passive. Every country on the planet does the same thing one way or another. The powerful countries use economics and military power to protect their interests while the smaller countries play the big countries off one another to gain favors and protection. The first priority of any government is helping their own country first and everybody else comes in a distant 2nd.
Except the rich have to do something with their money, usually putting it in a bank, or investing it, which is used to fund loans to other businesses or individuals, which generates jobs or allows people to get mortgages.
Yet having too much liquidity can lead to massive bubbles, as investors seek advantageous places to put large sums. Speculation can do nasty things like drive up oil prices, much as we saw in 2008, or land prices, such as we saw shortly thereafter.
Bubbles happen where there is too much investment money to play with. Investment houses have an incentive to work the bubbles, as the house holds all the cards. And bubbles have an enormous negative impact on the functioning of the economy as a whole. I see no justifiable reason for increasing the amount of money that rich people have, and many historically backed arguments against doing so -- essentially eviscerating your point above.
Money the government spends on things people wouldn't buy on their own (agricultural subsidies, bank bailouts) create inefficiency in the economy and slow growth.
When things are not quite so corrupt, we have seen the following instead:
Money the government spends on things people wouldn't buy on their own (bridges, basic research) creates efficiency in the economy and generates growth.
The arguments for spreading resources more broadly across a population are much stronger and more numerous than the arguments for concentrating wealth in the hands of a select few. I would not go so far as to be a French Republican (circa the late 1700s), but I would go so far as to describe the recent tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy push as an exceedingly bad idea.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
it's no my country. my coutry is brasil, which ALSO suffered from american imperialism back in 1964 when your government armed and supported (including a carrier parked near rio de janeiro) the military coup that overthrew a democratically elected government, just because said govt. was socialist leaning. people from my family died fighting the coup in the araguaia guerilla, and their bodies were left to rot under the sun.
but back to afghanistan, your government used as bargaining chip that they'd help rebuild the country after the soviet were gone. well, they broke their word, and that part of the world, promisses are sacred. you break your word, you pay the price.
What ? Me, worry ?
Along the same lines.
You kill Americans do not be surprised when bombs drop from the sky.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?