Slashdot Mirror


Saudi Arabian Telecom Pitches to Moxie Marlinspike

An anonymous reader sent in this excerpt from Moxie Marlinspike's weblog: "Last week I was contacted by an agent of Mobily, one of two telecoms operating in Saudi Arabia, about a surveillance project that they're working on in that country. Having published two reasonably popular MITM tools, it's not uncommon for me to get emails requesting that I help people with their interception projects. I typically don't respond, but this one (an email titled 'Solution for monitoring encrypted data on telecom') caught my eye. ... The requirements are the ability to both monitor and block mobile data communication, and apparently they already have blocking setup. ... When they eventually asked me for a price quote, and I indicated that I wasn't interested in the job for privacy reasons, they responded with this: ' I know that already and I have same thoughts like you freedom and respecting privacy, actually Saudi has a big terrorist problem and they are misusing these services for spreading terrorism and contacting and spreading their cause that's why I took this and I seek your help. If you are not interested than maybe you are on indirectly helping those who curb the freedom with their brutal activities.'"

128 comments

  1. They should consult with the US Government, by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    our officials here have snooped on us in every way possible for years. When they can't figure out how to snoop (old Skype) they simply hire Microsoft to buy the company and add a back-door.

    The Saudi's could learn a lot from us.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re: They should consult with the US Government, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Quick! Move to Saudi Arabia while it's still free!

    2. Re:They should consult with the US Government, by TWiTfan · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Saudi's could learn a lot from us.

      You can bet they already have. The CIA has been actively propping up the ruling regime there for decades.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  2. Why didn't he take it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did the Saudi's use M$?

  3. Yeah, yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you don't spy on your own people, the terrorists win. Heard it all before.

  4. Saudi Arabia won''t last by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The ruling al-Saud family will soon have to come with a follow-up for the current king. In the same time, a complete army of foreign experts & technicians is required to keep the entire Saudi infrastructure ( telco, roads, water supply, power generation ) running. Moreover, the Saudi government is continuously spying upon its citizens, as a habit. Women are slowly beginning to protest against the enormous discrimination and contempt they live under.

    All of this taken together mixes up quite explosively. Mark my words: 25 years from now, Saudi Arabia as we know it will have gone down

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      The ruling al-Saud family will soon have to come with a follow-up for the current king. In the same time, a complete army of foreign experts & technicians is required to keep the entire Saudi infrastructure ( telco, roads, water supply, power generation ) running. Moreover, the Saudi government is continuously spying upon its citizens, as a habit. Women are slowly beginning to protest against the enormous discrimination and contempt they live under.

      All of this taken together mixes up quite explosively. Mark my words: 25 years from now, Saudi Arabia as we know it will have gone down

      Sooner than that, I think. The succession passes brother to brother among the sons of Abdulaziz. The youngest was born in the mid 1940s. The available heirs are getting older and older very very fast.

      When the brothers are all gone, Saudi Arabia will fall into chaos and that could happen in the next few years.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    2. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      The discrimination against women is not a result of the royal family. It's a result of the capitulation of the royal family to the demands of the religious fanatics to avoid seeming insufficiently Islamic. If the house of Saud falls, things will get much, much worse for anybody who isn't a straight, Sunni Muslim, male.

    3. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Hopefully we'll manage to finish repatriating all that American oil they went and put their country on top of before that happens...

    4. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      I it happens it'll affect the oil supply and that will throw the entire planet into chaos. The house of Saud is necessary.

    5. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah right, and there will be peace in the Middle East within the next 100 years.

    6. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Tokolosh · · Score: 2

      Oil at $30/bbl will collapse the House of Saud and nobody will care.

      http://www.icis.com/blogs/chemicals-and-the-economy/2013/05/oil-markets-risk-rapid-reprici-1.html

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    7. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      Mark my words: 25 years from now, Saudi Arabia as we know it will have gone down

      I agree with you, but my fear is that what's going to replace it will be much much worse. The Arab Spring has shown that if given the choice, Muslims will choose to enslave themselves in repressive Islamo-fascist regimes. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the successor regime to the House of Saud ends up being Osama Bin Laden's dream government. Even Turkey has gone backwards. 10 years ago they had a legitimate shot at joining the EU and now the unspoken truth is that the EU will never let them in because they fear what they have already become and they fear that they could get even worse.

    8. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by myowntrueself · · Score: 1
      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    9. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please. If you can explain why your argument applies to succession in Saudi Arabia, but not why it applies to North Korea, I'll take it seriously.

    10. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The house of Saudi is essentially ceremonial, like the Queen of England. The terrorists already run the country, and with western/eastern help have spread worldwide, who, in case you haven't noticed, are reveling in the total destruction. So when the Great Pirates once again bring order to the galaxy, they will be heroes.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      They weren't given a 'choice'. It was the choice they were given. The only thing that bloomed during the "Arab Spring" was the arms trade..

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    12. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> The house of Saud is necessary.

      The oil can be exploited by any old despot, monarch, or dictator.

    13. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      *democratize that oil

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    14. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      And what about the chaos in the mean time? Also there is no guarantee religious fanatics would be willing to play by rational rules. They would be more likely to hold the oil supply hostage as a weapon.

    15. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Oh please. If you can explain why your argument applies to succession in Saudi Arabia, but not why it applies to North Korea, I'll take it seriously.

      Oh wow ok then, I really feel that I need to be taken seriously by some Anonymous Coward on Slashdot!

      First let me say, I never mentioned North Korea. Second let me say, WHY THE FUCK should I care whether you take this seriously?

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    16. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, fine. It'll be there after we've liberated the shit out of them. In the interim, we'll have higher fuel prices. Big whoop.

    17. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, no! It's very much an autocratic monarchy, and there ain't elected representatives under a Prime Minister, as in the UK. If there were, al Qaeda would be the largest party. Which is why Western leaders in both Europe & the US shmooze with the Sauds - it's they who control Aramco, oil prices & supplies and all that power. Only difference between the Sauds & al Qaeda - the Sauds are willing to play footsie with these infidels, which al Qaeda wouldn't - they'd just use that money solely to finance world jihad.

    18. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were happy with that choice. In every Arab country that had elections, Islamic parties won in landslides - Tunisia, Morocco, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt... The only people who actively oppose Islamic parties are non-Muslim minorities, like Egyptian Copts, Syrian Assyrians & Melkites, and so on.

    19. Re:Saudi Arabia won''t last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can explain why your argument applies to succession in Saudi Arabia, but not why it applies to North Korea, I'll take it seriously.

      Succession within the Kim line has been from father to chosen son. Succession within the Saud line has been from older brother to younger brother. When they run out of brothers, does rule pass to the oldest son of the oldest, long-dead brother, or to the oldest son of the youngest, most recent ruler? Just how many people with legitimate claim to the Saud throne will there be?

  5. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet if it was the US or UK government or some such that came a-knockin this person wouldn't have blabbed that fact all over the internets. But it's the Saudis and they're evil. Ok, I have no proof whatsoever of any potential double-standards and I'm no saint myself but just sayin.

  6. Cracks are forming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will quickly be forgotten as the march of internet history steamrolls entire states, but the general framing of this Saudi guy's response showing that tiny cracks are already forming in these societies. This guy's bosses probably doesn't understand that continually framing your opinion as "I care about freedom" will begin to rewire everything and they'll wake up one day with one less brick in their walls.

  7. Re:Dumbass. by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 0

    If it was real, I'd be a bit leery about posting details to the public in a way that identifies himself. You never know if an Al-Saud crony might off him. That family themselves HAVE been tied to terrorist groups, or at least certain members of them.

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  8. Not sure if troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or just an asshole

  9. Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, they rule by an army inducing terror on a populace, not because the populace chose the leadership.

    Terrorist in that sense is just a term dictators apply to their opponents. Syria and Assad springs to mind, he calls the opponents terrorists for objecting to him being dictator. Israel and Gaza Palastinians is another example of using the terrorist label to suppress an opponent.

    1. Re:Dictatorship by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 1

      Far be it from me to make fun of a bad situation, but I wonder if the spin doctors who come up with these labels for their legitimate opponents have a BOFH-style excuse calendar to pick who they're blaming everything on this month?

    2. Re:Dictatorship by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, they rule by an army inducing terror on a populace, not because the populace chose the leadership.

      The problem is that in Muslim countries the political system they chose is invariably worse. Libya is worse than it was under Gaddafi, Egypt is worse now than under Mubarak, Iraq is worse than under Saddam Husain, and Afghanistan is infinitely worse off than it was under Soviet rule.

      Yes, Saudi Arabia is bad, but anything that keeps the Muslims under control is better than letting them have their way .... which is not giving them freedom but allowing them to murder, kill, and rape others as well as killing eachother and removing freedoms under sectarian Sharia militias.

    3. Re:Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are people modding this down because they don't like the facts? Chrisq has given references from reliable sources showing that where there has been a popular uprising in an Islamic country things have got worse. Do you dispute this or do you just not like the truth?

    4. Re:Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are downmodding because it takes the evidence of "uprisings going badly and things being crap shortly afterwards" and turns it into religious hatred with poor justification.

    5. Re:Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think I'd call RT a reliable source. Libya is slowly improving even if the same can't be said about any of the others. Afghanistan would be quite stable if not for extensive external support being provided to the Tabliban - they lack enough momentum within the country to maintain their movement, and consequentially it has decayed from within despite the appearance of greater effectivity.
      The failures in Egypt and Saudi Arabia rest more than anything else with runaway overpopulation far outstripping what the countries' resources can support. Since the revolution Egypt has seen its birth rate increase and family planning go into decline. Many Islamists take the "Islam can feed any number" line.

    6. Re:Dictatorship by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      Yes, because there is certainly no pattern there. It's not like these were all moderate Muslim countries whose dictators were overthrown and whose populace elected radical Muslims into power the second they got democracy.

      Oh, wait....

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    7. Re:Dictatorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, they rule by an army inducing terror on a populace, not because the populace chose the leadership.

      The problem is that in Muslim countries the political system they chose is invariably worse. Libya is worse than it was under Gaddafi, Egypt is worse now than under Mubarak, Iraq is worse than under Saddam Husain, and Afghanistan is infinitely worse off than it was under Soviet rule.

      Yes, Saudi Arabia is bad, but anything that keeps the Muslims under control is better than letting them have their way .... which is not giving them freedom but allowing them to murder, kill, and rape others as well as killing eachother and removing freedoms under sectarian Sharia militias.

      "How do you pick who can vote when the average person votes badly and selfishly?" That is the central question of Starship Troopers (the book, not the movie). One could easily argue many western states get pushed worse off over time due to democracy.

      I'm not advocating any particular view here, other than maybe we could do with a little self introspection.

    8. Re:Dictatorship by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Dunno, seems to me that the world's democracies have outlasted any Islamic nation's form of government, and are still doing pretty well -- and better and better relative to those Islamic nations over the course of time.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    9. Re:Dictatorship by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Dunno, seems to me that the world's democracies have outlasted any Islamic nation's form of government, and are still doing pretty well -- and better and better relative to those Islamic nations over the course of time.

      Thats because the foundational principle of the modern democracy is to keep the mass of people believing that they have some say in things and to preserve this illusion by presenting the face of a chaotic, randomly changing elected government. Democratically 'elected' government is about as organised as Brownian motion.

      The reality, which is where the extreme stability comes in, is that the elections are a sham and the real power is wielded well behind the scenes by powers that can make or break any elected politician at a whim.

      Ie its not amazingly stable and successful because Joe Public is allowed to have a say in how the country is run. Its amazingly stable and successful because Joe Public is kept well the fuck away from running the country.

      Good thing, bad thing, I don't know. Not going to make a value judgement on that yet.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  10. He's right by sonamchauhan · · Score: 0

    The Saudi bloke seems to have said nothing wrong... and he is sincere. Which is more than you can say about Moxie -- who's protecting "privacy" by revealing one side of a private conversation.

    1. Re:He's right by sonamchauhan · · Score: 2

      Actually, let me reverse my own comment... (having read up on Saudi Arabia's human right's record).

      The issue is the Saudi's can target terror with these MITM tools -- true. But they also have a track record targeting basic human rights (free press, faith).

      Moxie is well within his rights turning down the job. However, its best he did not reveal the name of the Saudi gent (who still seems sincere).

    2. Re:He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait... so your conditions for a government being able to intercept all communications consist solely of their "human rights record"? And you see nothing wrong with this?

    3. Re:He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you are not interested than maybe you are on indirectly helping those who curb the freedom with their brutal activities."

      That "agent" can go fuck himself.

    4. Re:He's right by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Actually, let me reverse my own comment... (having read up on Saudi Arabia's human right's record).

      The issue is the Saudi's can target terror with these MITM tools -- true. But they also have a track record targeting basic human rights (free press, faith).

      Moxie is well within his rights turning down the job. However, its best he did not reveal the name of the Saudi gent (who still seems sincere).

      I'm sure the Saudis would be interested in people seeking to free slaves as well.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    5. Re:He's right by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      No, they'd be something akin to a wiretap warrant issued by (mostly) just judges following (mostly) just laws.

      They do have significant terror issues and want to be able to do these intercepts...

      The problem is their track record on human rights. Being ruled by just laws is a human right. It's upto Moxie. But have you considered the implications of moxie revealing this man's name. Think about it Mr. ..? Mr. Anonymous Coward.

      And btw, your govt. is *able* to intercept communications. Including this. But I think you mean intercept all comms

    6. Re:He's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot expect a conversation to stay "private". Make me an unpleasant offer, and I will tell the world what you are up to. I do not protect your dirty secrets.

      I have exposed people who harassed med in "private email". He could not beleive I would do that - I could not believe he had any expectation of pricacy whatsoever. The rule is really simple - attack me, and I fight back in some way.

  11. Re:Dumbass. by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the western governments would be a bit more clever than that. They have the resources to develop their own home grown spying tools. They don't need an outside consultant, which is what this guy would have been. Otherwise you'd be hearing about this kind of stuff all the time.

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  12. Re:Dumbass. by Cenan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well I guess that's your view then. I specifically didn't mention any nation, only "the job".

    It's about high fucking time people in the western world realise that freedom cannot be passive. You can't just sit back in your armchair and blab. Be offensive, do a number on these scumbags. If he really, really cared about privacy he would have fought for the millions of people who are going to be spied on anyway, just not with his tool. This applies equally to the UK as it does to Saudi Arabia, this story just happens to be set in a country most people around here don't like.

    People like the guy in the story makes me fucking sick. You realise that where you are born and the freedoms you enjoy are all PURE LUCK, and one of the few things in your life you have no control over. Why should freedom be restrained to people lucky enough to be born under a constitution? Spread the wealth.

    --
    ... whatever ...
  13. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I bet if it was the US or UK government or some such that came a-knockin this person wouldn't have blabbed that fact all over the internets. But it's the Saudis and they're evil. Ok, I have no proof whatsoever of any potential double-standards and I'm no saint myself but just sayin.

    Then you clearly don't know who Moxie Marlinspike is (which seems kind of odd, as he's an extremely well known security researcher).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike
    Aside fromt he fact that he's been championing against the certificate authority sytem because it gives the US too much power, there's also the fact that he's an anarchist (he's written anarchist pieces completely unrelated to technology, and founded the Anarchist Yacht Club). That the Saudis contacted him speaks volumes to their incompetence, imho.

  14. Typical Bully Line by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 1

    "If you're not with us, you're against us."

    That's really the best line they can come up with? I just got a faint ping on my dubiousonar.

    1. Re:Typical Bully Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I used to get this line a lot after writing some papers on/developing a darknet. I was even harassed about it by a government employee at a conference.

      It's the same old weary rhetoric they use to push controversial legislation; Terrorism and child protection. These are the two things that governments have spread enough FUD about to immediately silence any debate on the protection of privacy.

      It's not just citizens under oppressive regimes that have to operate under the premise that they are being monitored. Fellow EU citizens cluck their tongues in their ivory towers at the policy in the US and the UK, but seem to forget that they allowed legislation to pass in the region which allows the capture and mining of all communications therein.

    2. Re:Typical Bully Line by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      "If you're not with us, you're against us."

      That's really the best line they can come up with? I just got a faint ping on my dubiousonar.

      well, they had to come up with SOMETHING.
      you know, since their emails were being read by the state thought police and of course they know it.

      once you get enough gestapo going on in a country, the communications cease to be to the person they're addressed to and end up being done for the sake of the people running surveillance - and even the people running the surveillance come trapped in the surveillance - like 4 stasi agents ratting each other out after trying to get each other to perform some crime or another.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Typical Bully Line by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Being fair though, while the line was a bit over the top starring sylvester stallone, it was pretty valid to make.

      Moxie refused for a set of reasons, the agent pointed out that by refusing for those reasons, that though the work could possibly be used to violate principals Moxie does not wish violated -- that by refusing the work, Moxie would be allowing a greater form of evil to continue for fear of creating a smaller form of evil.

      I mean, I'm not saying I AGREE with anyone here, but I believe that's what the agent believes. And I can totally sympathize, with ALL parties involved, because if fighting the evil of mankind was simple and easy everyone would be doing it

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
  15. Moxie should work as a free agent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moxie should work with social networks / communications systems to help secure them against such attacks. He's shown that he won't compromise on the matter, so hopefully the offers come in from WhatsApp and others to hire him as a secure communications consultant.

  16. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    instead of doing real work that helps real people.

    Are we talking about the same Moxie Marlinspike?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moxie_Marlinspike
    Who wrote things like:
    http://convergence.io/details.html
    https://github.com/WhisperSystems/RedPhone
    https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure/
    (aguably the most used encrypted communications apps for Android)
    http://tack.io/
    http://www.audioanarchy.org/
    http://www.blueanarchy.org/
    https://www.cloudcracker.com/

    I could go on. Hell, I haven't even gotten to the talks he's done and the vulnerabilities he's disclosed.
    Seriously, if you're that dismissive of Moxie Marlinspike, you MUST have cured a major disease or something. Please, do tell.

  17. Fucktard by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He didn't come running to slash dot he posted it to his blog! Someone else posted it to slash dot so take your foot out of your mouth and shove it back up your arse.

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  18. The government view - us and them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most interesting thing about the whole episode for me is that the person who is ostensibly in charge of things responds to MM's refusal to help by basically saying "if you are not helping us with blanket surveillance of our population in our efforts to find terrorists, then you must be either working with or sympathetic to those terrorists".
    I can understand the Saudis being sensitive to terrorist threats - they are a repressive monarchy; Osama bin Laden was a Saudi citizen... the bin Laden family is very close to the Saudi Royal Family; and the Arab Spring clearly changed the face of arabic politics and government, and anyone looking to depose the monarchy or force change faster than the king can push the more conservative clerics in his ruling circle will be seen as some variant of terrorist, I am sure.

    Plus the status of the Arabic members of society in Saudi Arabia basically means that they are not used to their requests/demands being refused unless the request is being made of another arab, so there is an element of "toys being thrown out of the pram" there.

  19. Point of view by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:Point of view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Terrorism is a tactic.

      You can fight for freedom without resorting to terrorism, you can be a terrorist without having any interest in freedom.

      Sure you get a media bias and "friendly" governments tend get a pass, but really it has nothing to do with which side you are on and everything to do with what you actually do.

    2. Re:Point of view by evensteven6 · · Score: 1

      yeah no kidding

    3. Re:Point of view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, one man's terrorist is another man's agent.

    4. Re:Point of view by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Also, one man's terrorist is another man's agent.

      And sometimes one man's agent becomes that same man's terrorist.

      Oops, we're not allowed to talk about that.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:Point of view by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Hey, when a government gets blowback for being repressive and corrupt, the only valid response is to become more repressive and corrupt.

      Right?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  20. blocking revolution facilitating tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the participants in the "arab spring" used a variety of tools to facilitate and coordinate their activities - including twitter.

    The saudis have since bought a major stake in twitter. I wonder why..

    So this article is no doubt just a part of what they are doing to stop being overthrown.

    1. Re:blocking revolution facilitating tools by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Informative

      the participants in the "arab spring" used a variety of tools to facilitate and coordinate their activities

      I'm glad you used quotes around "arab spring", in reality it has turned out to be an islamist winter.

    2. Re:blocking revolution facilitating tools by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right, ...due to lack of U.S. 'leadership' (translation: outside meddling)?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:blocking revolution facilitating tools by tqk · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you used quotes around "arab spring", in reality it has turned out to be an islamist winter [washingtontimes.com].

      That's from Oct. 2011. "This won't turn out well, kids!"

      Why does it appear we're experiencing a full court press denouncing the Arab Spring this morning? Were you guys there poo pooing Hungary's and Czechoslovakia's attempted revolts too? Revolutions can be messy and all of these countries have a lot of messy stuff lingering from their previous regimes. We're still waiting for Russia to get over its problems after "getting rid of the Soviets" (chyaa, right!). Hell, we're still waiting for the UK to get over its British Empire crap.

      What's the real agenda you're pushing? You remind me of GHWB's reticence to recognize the fall of the Soviets. I thought freedom was considered a good thing.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    4. Re:blocking revolution facilitating tools by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      "There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity,” President Obama said in May. In his typically weak manner, he also cautioned that, “we must proceed with a sense of humility."

      1. He is correct about the humility. Unless we are interested in creating a proper constitution that does not allow religion in lawmaking, with associated 15+ year pacification-level military involvement, i.e. 10x more, more like what we did after WWII, such that a whole new generation can grow up under it, expecting it, forget it. You see the issues in Afghanistan and Iraq.

      2. The idea of "ooooh! Look at them self-determine!", when that means either a different dictatorship, or a constitution that acknowledges primacy of one religion beyond trivialities, is no thing to view as a value, and we should be embarrassed to do so.

      There is no honor in that, and we disable ourselves by feigning so.

      It is no different from terrorists seizing a stadium of people and some idiot external politician praising the stadium for practicing self-determination.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  21. How much were they paying ?? by nomad63 · · Score: 1

    If you don't do it, somebody will. If the price is right, why not that somebody be me ? We are living the biggest capitalist economy of the world. And money makes the world go round, despite what some nut-jobs believe...

    --

    __________
    The more I know people, the more I love animals
    1. Re:How much were they paying ?? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      No, rotational inertia makes the world go round. Money is a very recent addition that facilitates trade and allows a select (lucky/ruthless) few to accumulate and leverage wealth far in excess of anything our ancestors could have dreamed of. Not everyone agrees that it's the best way to run the world, and many of us consider things like principles, compassion, etc. to be the more valuable assets.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  22. was it really a saudi agent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why does everyone assume it really was a Saudi agent? Could just as well have been a western agent testing him.

    1. Re:was it really a saudi agent? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Why would a western agent care? Technology export restrictions? We already know the Saudi's are doing this sort of thing, and much of the west is already using or at least developing such tools to monitor their own populace.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  23. A sign of problems in the CA system by andrew3 · · Score: 1

    From Ars Technica:

    "One of the design documents that they volunteered specifically called out compelling a [certificate authority] in the jurisdiction of the UAE or Saudi Arabia to produce SSL certificates that they could use for interception," Marlinspike wrote in a blog post.

    Clearly there is something wrong with the public key infrastructure on the web.

  24. Saudis? Or somebody closer to home.... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

    ' I know that already and I have same thoughts like you freedom and respecting privacy, actually Saudi has a big terrorist problem and they are misusing these services for spreading terrorism and contacting and spreading their cause that's why I took this and I seek your help. If you are not interested than maybe you are on indirectly helping those who curb the freedom with their brutal activities.'"

    Is this a quote from the Saudi government? Sounds like something Canada's Vic Toews would say. Or maybe somebody from Washington D.C.....

    I'm confused.....

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  25. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know who he is now. I get the impression that he's kind of a big deal?

  26. Re:Dumbass. by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

    No, it is not luck. You got to pick your parents carefully.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  27. Re:Dumbass. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the western governments would be a bit more clever than that. They have the resources to develop their own home grown spying tools. They don't need an outside consultant, which is what this guy would have been. Otherwise you'd be hearing about this kind of stuff all the time.

    Western governments employ a more than a few outside contractors for 'electronic operations'(and quite a few others for other purposes). They just aren't generally foolish enough to contact known, high-profile, security researchers with a history of publicity for sensitive work...

  28. Re:Dumbass. by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

    Messing with national governments can be a very dangerous game. If they found out he was planting a backdoor halfway through the project things could go south in a real hurry, and they'd have to be very incompetent not to have some sort of double blind checks in place. Even if he never entered the country he'd have to avoid it and everywhere it has an extradition treaty with (like India) forever. And what gain? Evidence that they are suppressing dissent, persecuting women? We already know that.

    There are less risky ways to bring the fight to them.

  29. Re:Dumbass. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    Do tell me more about how he could have fought to bring freedom to the suffering Saudi masses...

    Was he supposed to take the job, then use his access to covertly haxx0r the mainframe and destroy the Master Control Computer?

  30. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think he's just pointing out their attempt at reverse psychology. For those unfamiliar with it you can think back to Bugs Bunny changing his position to "Rabbit Season" in order to fool Daffy Duck into claiming that it was "Duck Season".

  31. Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking it by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Informative
    That's nice, except that the issue with the Saudi regime *itself* is that it's as much a part of the problem of terrorism as it is of the solution. That is, it presents two different faces to the world- the one it likes to present to the West, and the one it likes to present to the Wahhabist elements within the country. They need to not merely tolerate, but pander to the latter in order to remain power.

    (For those who didn't want to read the linked article, the tl;dr version is that Wahhabism is the Saudi-founded brand of Islam that Al-Qaeda et al espouse; if you've ever heard the term "Islamo-fascism", Wahhabism is the interpretation of Islam it's most likely referring to).

    In other words, the Saudi regime is in the position of having to be blatantly two-faced about this; claiming to be cracking down on terrorism to their Western allies, while at the same time being one of the largest supporters of it.

    Of course, the West knows this, but likes to pretend otherwise, because there's the inconvenient fact that they have lots of oil which we want. Regarding Western attitudes towards extremist Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia isn't merely the elephant in the room in the sense that it's a major factor- as the home and the heart of Wahhabism, it's arguably *the* central factor. Modern Saudi Arabia was *founded* on an agreement between Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism) and the house of Saud to spread his teachings while the latter retained power. From Wikipedia:-

    Upon arriving in Diriyya, a pact was made between Ibn Saud and Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab, by which Ibn Saud pledged to implement and enforce Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab's teachings, while Ibn Saud and his family would remain the temporal "leaders" of the movement.

    Many of the alleged grievances of terrorists supporting Wahhabist organisations such as Al-Qaeda revolve around the supposed US "occupation" of Saudi Arabia. Yet, despite all this, you'll rarely hear Western politicians attack the Saudi regime for their covert tolerance of extremist elements. Why? See the start of this paragraph.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  32. Moxie by benjfowler · · Score: 0

    Smart guy, but a bit of a windbag. Expressing himself clearly obviously isn't one of his strong suits.

    And TBH, betraying a confidence and humiliating people in public also rates as unethical. I normally don't give a damn about muslims, but that's pretty rude.

    1. Re: Moxie by Ellie+K · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Aside from the fact that he's been championing against the certificate authority system...

      Yes! I was wondering when someone would mention this! Anyone who's curious can glance at Moxie's repositories on Github. It is exactly as you described, about his efforts to make a better certificate authority system. I don't know if it was because it gave the U.S. too much power, or because it was not especially reliable (I think DigiNotar or Digi something cert auth break happened around then), many other issues.

      I have mixed feelings about Moxie. He's very much the Anarchist, rebel hax00r. But he isn't insufferably arrogant like some of his peers are. He's a good sailor (not yachts!); sometimes I like what he has to say. And he looks sweet, handsome in the one photo I've seen of him, not overstated or hipster-odious. Anyway, the last time I checked, Moxie was a Twitter employee.

      Good point too about the oddity that "agents of a foreign power", whether Saudi Arabia or any other, would approach Moxie for such work. It is unlikely that Saudi Arabia would be less informed than you and I. Moxie has a hefty entry in Wikipedia. I even wrote a post on my hobby blog about one of his projects a few years ago! I have no doubt that retaining Moxie's services would be worthwhile. But there are many less visible, less vocal alternatives.

      I wish I could say "thank you" to whomever submitted the original post here. Good find!

      --
      tempus fugit
    2. Re: Moxie by Ellie+K · · Score: 1

      I'm really surprised that Moxie isn't more well-known around here. I just commented earlier about Moxie's Github repositories. I'm not a sycophant, and realize that Moxie has a lot of fans. He has done good work, regardless of politics or advocacy.

      --
      tempus fugit
    3. Re:Moxie by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Suite yourself. I'd say tyrants deserve all the exposure and humiliation we can pile on them.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  33. Re:Dumbass. by bistromath007 · · Score: 1

    That sounds like an excellent way to get assassinated.

  34. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're the dumb one. He didn't post it to /., someone who reads his blog has.

  35. "who curb the freedom with their brutal activities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, Saudi Arabia? The country where women are not allowed to move in public without their male warden (usually husband, brother, or father) or they'll both get flogged? Death penalty for homosexuality? Death penalty for spreading non-Islamic religions? Draconic penalties (not excluding death penalty) for bartering in alcohol?

    We are not talking about "curb the freedom" here but rather "impact reliably cheap oil prices". Which is the same as far as the U.S. is concerned since whatever happens out of America stays out of America.

  36. Moxie's To-Do list: Don't go to Saudi Arbia by Craefter · · Score: 1

    In their twisted for of reality they could arrest you for "aiding the enemy".

    In other news: Don't go to the States, you could get arrested for downloading a song.

    1. Re:Moxie's To-Do list: Don't go to Saudi Arbia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      double edged sword, the saudi gov could have him beheaded and the anti saudi gov militias would try to kill him

      remember where OBL came from

  37. Those who are not with us are against us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the guy was invoking anecdotes, give him this one: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

  38. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're quite the dipshit, aren't you?

  39. No Problem by jasper160 · · Score: 1

    Cisco, Bluecoat, or on of the other big firms will "help" them.

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished.
  40. Re:"who curb the freedom with their brutal activit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't do those things in SA. But when I was stationed in SA and these holier than though punks would go to Bahrain they were drinking and whoring like there was no tomorrow.

  41. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just pull a Lawrence and alter the arrangement.

  42. Re:Dumbass. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    he already knows the saudis sent emails to him. no need to worry about that.

    I'd be worried about just traveling to saudi arabia even if they have no beef with me. fuck 'em and their politics - and especially fuck their police.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  43. Moxie's Yacht Delivery to Saudi Going Wrong by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

    In next weeks slashdot I expect to see something about Moxie Marlinspike being asked to deliver a nice shiny yacht to Saudi Arabia and it going horribly wrong when he gets arrested for piracy :)

    --
    I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  44. I'm more amazed he's not more well known.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that we've had at least what, a half dozen stories about him on the front page of slashdot, at least 2-3 of them in the past 5-6 years?

  45. Re:Dumbass. by Luckyo · · Score: 1

    That would have been akin to suicide. Not only is that a serious contract violation, this is a security breach in a country with both significant funds and extreme interests from several Western and Eastern intelligence agencies.

    Pulling off shit like that is a sure ticket to one day being added to list of people who vanished without trace or getting found dead from overdose of drugs in a hotel room. People in intelligence have decades of experience in tracking people like OP when they work for them and finding their backdoors.

  46. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Dogtanian · · Score: 1
    Correction;

    (Final line) Why? See the start of this paragraph.

    That's what I get for over-editing; this was originally part of the paragraph that started:-

    Of course, the West knows this, but likes to pretend otherwise, because there's the inconvenient fact that they have lots of oil which we want.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  47. Re:Saudis? Or somebody closer to home.... by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

    You're expecting too much. I've yet to find a business anywhere that didn't send out personal communications with poor spelling and grammar and punctuation, and I've yet to find out that hasn't posted signage on their premises somewhere that is void of typos.

    If I see one more " thank's! " in my life.. it won't matter, because one is already too many. how do you even fucking make a mistake like that good fucking.....

    --
    ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
  48. Re:Dumbass. by jameshofo · · Score: 1

    No, just no.

    --
    Good leaders run toward problems, bad leaders hide from them.
  49. Do not get involved by koan · · Score: 1

    Your ethics won't be the only thing in danger.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  50. Re:Dumbass. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

    Was he supposed to take the job, then use his access to covertly haxx0r the mainframe and destroy the Master Control Computer?

    Program. Master Control Program, duh.

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  51. Re:Dumbass. by pnutjam · · Score: 1

    Shhh... Most people don't remember that.

  52. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is perfectly right. The reason al Qaeda exists is Wahabism, and the Wahabis came to power in the first place as a part of the partnership with the Sauds. At any rate, the root cause of terrorism is Islam, which at its heart preaches all the things that the Wahabis practice. Sure, implementations vary across the Muslim empire, but the bottom line - encourage terror against Infidels until they accept Islamic supremacy - is pretty much common from Morocco to Mindanao.

    If one visits Saudi Arabia, one notes how rigid that country is about being Islamic. During Ramadan, non-Muslims have to eat privately, and similarly, any non-Muslim religious activities have to be clandestine. In Saudi offices, during the Muezzin (call to prayer, which is 5 times a day), it is mandatory for all Muslims (practicing or nominal) to take prayer breaks. It's illegal to build churches, synagogues or any temples of other religions in KSA. But before atheists here get all excited about that, note that Atheism is not the official religion of KSA - Islam is, and it's NEVER illegal to build mosques anywhere. And of course, as is well known, Mecca & Medina are off-limits to non-Muslims - something unparalleled today in other religions: non-Catholics can very much visit the Vatican, non-Jews can visit Jerusalem, non-Hindus can visit Varanasi and so on. Not so in Islam.

    Not just that - in Saudi Arabia, any material that has nothing about religion but is judged by their equivalent of the KGB as being 'un-Islamic' has a good chance of being impounded. I've heard horror stories of people on ships that were just in transit in Saudi ports who got their books impounded for that very reason. If al Qaeda ever did take over in Riyadh and establish their Caliphate, how much worse could they conceivably be? There is already no religious freedom in that country, and those troglodytes are just offering more Islam.

    In short, just like in Syria, there is no right side to pick in Saudi Arabia - they are all Islamic fanatics who want to perfect a theocracy and export Jihad worldwide. The Saudis actively do it - Aramco, which is wholly owned by the Saudi government, funds dawa (Islamic proselytization) worldwide, and also funds Jihadi groups, like the Sunni rebels in Syria. Those Sunni rebels are directly allied with the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda, so it would make no difference who runs Riyadh. (Of course, with the US itself supporting al Qaeda in Syria, it loses any rationale to speak against terror, especially when it steadfastly refuses to recognize the link between jihad terror and Islam)

  53. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's nice, except that the issue with the Saudi regime *itself* is that it's as much a part of the problem of terrorism as it is of the solution. That is, it presents two different faces to the world- the one it likes to present to the West, and the one it likes to present to the Wahhabist elements within the country. They need to not merely tolerate, but pander to the latter in order to remain power.

    (For those who didn't want to read the linked article, the tl;dr version is that Wahhabism is the Saudi-founded brand of Islam that Al-Qaeda et al espouse; if you've ever heard the term "Islamo-fascism", Wahhabism is the interpretation of Islam it's most likely referring to).

    In other words, the Saudi regime is in the position of having to be blatantly two-faced about this; claiming to be cracking down on terrorism to their Western allies, while at the same time being one of the largest supporters of it.

    Of course, the West knows this, but likes to pretend otherwise, because there's the inconvenient fact that they have lots of oil which we want. Regarding Western attitudes towards extremist Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia isn't merely the elephant in the room in the sense that it's a major factor- as the home and the heart of Wahhabism, it's arguably *the* central factor. Modern Saudi Arabia was *founded* on an agreement between Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab (the founder of Wahhabism) and the house of Saud to spread his teachings while the latter retained power. From Wikipedia:-

    Upon arriving in Diriyya, a pact was made between Ibn Saud and Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab, by which Ibn Saud pledged to implement and enforce Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab's teachings, while Ibn Saud and his family would remain the temporal "leaders" of the movement.

    Many of the alleged grievances of terrorists supporting Wahhabist organisations such as Al-Qaeda revolve around the supposed US "occupation" of Saudi Arabia. Yet, despite all this, you'll rarely hear Western politicians attack the Saudi regime for their covert tolerance of extremist elements. Why? See the start of this paragraph.

    Except the alleged Wahabi's (another made up term) aren't the ones performing terrorist activities. That would be the Khawarij/kharijites.

    From their essentially political position, the Kharijites developed extreme doctrines that further set them apart from both mainstream Sunni and Shia Muslims. The Kharijites were particularly noted for adopting a radical approach to Takfir, whereby they declared other Muslims to be unbelievers and therefore deemed them worthy of death. The Kharijites were also known historically as the Shurh ()not to be confused with shr!, literally meaning "the buyers" and understood within the context of Islamic scripture and philosophy to mean "those who have traded the mortal life (al-Dunya) for the other life [with God] (al-Aakhirah)", which, unlike the term Kharijite, was one that many Kharijites used to describe themselves.

  54. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not a made up term. The term comes from the 17th century Islamic leader in Arabia Wahab, who followed the Hanbali doctrines of Islamic jurisprudence, and advocated a strict following of the original islam. The Sauds allied with them in the 20th century, and formed a coalition which took over the bulk of the Arabian peninsula, except for places like Yemen, Oman, Trucial States, Qatar, Bahrein & Kuwait.

  55. That's one beheaded saudi telco dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that the Saudi telco dude has publicly dissed their Kings, off with his head.

    The US supporting foreign kings... that's rich

  56. Using the US govt playbook eh? by techneeks · · Score: 1

    well if you wont fix "our " problem ... you are the problem

  57. Google 'Bandar' Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saudi Arabia, the Siamese twin of Israel, is the most depraved regime on the planet. Rape slaves were legal and bought/sold in Saudi Arabia openly until the law was changed in 1962. Read that again. No type. NINETEEN SIXTY TWO. Rape slaves were the 'concubines' of the most powerful members of the Saudi ruling elite- monstrous perverts placed in power by the British, and kept in power by the Americans. The fake version of Islam used by the House of Saud, the 'rulers' of Saudi Arabia, allows Saudi Wahabists (followers of Wahabism, which is actually a form of Judaism, NOT Islam, which is why Saudi Arabia and Israel operate as the twin favourites of the USA) to own as many sex slaves as they desire.

    The most powerful Saudi that the average American is likely to know is the so-called 'Bandar' Bush- the most intimate foreign friend of the Bush family (you know, the one that gave you Yanks THREE presidents- the third you will be getting soon). The mother of 'Bandar' Bush was a rape slave. In Saudi Arabia, you see, they don't have to secretly kidnap young girls off the street, and hide them in their basement for years.

    Today, Saudi rape slaves are mostly the foreign domestic workers from poor Muslim nations. Before a domestic worker is allowed to leave Saudi Arabia, she is forcibly confined, stripped, and subject (against her will) to intimate medical examination. Signs of sexual intercourse or, of course, pregnancy, automatically mean multiple flogging and a long term of imprisonment. However, if she has been compliant to her 'owner', her 'owner' will give her a 'pass' that allows her to leave the kingdom regardless of her 'condition'.

    All women in Saudi Arabia, including citizens, are the POSSESSION of nominated male/males. In the case of a citizen, her owner is her Father, other male relative, the State, or her husband. It is illegal for a woman to have no 'owner'. Her 'owner' has complete control over her life. She may not leave the house, get an education, or get married without EXPLICIT permission of her owner. Disobeying her owner means a trip to a reformatory, and a severe flogging.

    Now shills are going to attack this comment and tell you of all the 'humane' owners in Saudi Arabia who would never dream of abusing their female possessions. They are the same scum who defended slavery in the USA by describing all the 'kindly' slave owners. Of course, not every woman in Saudi Arabia is owned by a raping violet pig, but every woman IS owned, and her fate is in the hands of her owner.

    The power of the depraved Saudi regime is rapidly spreading across the Muslim world. Team Obama and Team Blair destroy secular modern nations like Libya and Syria so extremist Saudi forces can be given control over these populations. Did you know that Saudi religious 'judges' (the ones that convict and sentence women to floggings) operate in many different Muslim nations. Did you know that it is the goal of the US administration to get Saudi judges operating in EVERY Muslim nation?

  58. So where is the "security" open version of Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well?

    If security and tracking of mobiles matter - where is the open source version of Android that tries to be more secure?

  59. bullshit this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who believe on this news? i am not buying it ... not if this guy swear on this mother.

  60. Re:Dumbass. by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

    No, Saudi Arabia is very westernized in terms of dress and hygiene, as well as technology. People usually go there to strike it rich, because westerners get paid a ton of money to work on projects there. Still though, in the end they follow islamic traditions, many of which have horrible consequences if you violate.

    --
    Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  61. Re:Dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh but can you immiagine how much they would disagree with your society.

  62. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a strict interpretation does not mean terrorism!

  63. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Nadaka · · Score: 0

    And the root cause of Islam is Christianity, and the root cause of that was Judaism. Don't single out the new kid among the Abrahamic religions. They are all utterly vile and evil.

  64. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only problem with that tu-quoque argument is that Mohammed was neither a Christian nor a Jew. Islam was and is nothing more than the cult of Mohammed - just read how many times the Quran says that Muslims are to obey allah by obeying Mohammed

  65. Re:Saudi regime nurtures terrorism while attacking by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 1

    How many Christian or Jewish groups are throwing acid on womens faces, beheading people for heresy, or suicide bombing crowded markets because someone in the crowd had a minor deviation in religious observance?

  66. In related news, Twitter users are condemned by bLanark · · Score: 1

    The head of Saudi Arabia's religious police has warned citizens against using Twitter, which is rising in popularity among Saudis.

    Sheikh Abdul Latif Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh said anyone using social media sites - and especially Twitter - "has lost this world and his afterlife".

    Twitter was the platform for those who did not have any platform, he said.

    BBC News Middle East

    --
    Note to ACs: I won't mod you up, even if you are being funny or insightful. So take a chance! It's not real life!