Slashdot Mirror


New Leaks Threaten Human Smuggling Talks and Lead To Hack Attacks On Australia

cold fjord writes "Indonesia is threatening to cease cooperation with Australia on human smuggling as a result of further Snowden leaks published by the Guardian and other papers over the weekend. The leaks involve reported use of Australian embassies across Asia for signals intelligence as well as reports of intelligence operations by Australia and the U.S. in 2007 at the U.N. climate change conference in Bali. (In 2002 a terrorist attack at the Sari club in Bali killed 240 people, including 88 Australians.) As a result of the revelations, various groups are reportedly taking revenge, including claimed or alleged involvement of the Java Cyber Army, members of Anonymous in Indonesia, and possibly other hacker groups. They are attacking hundreds of Australian websites. Among the reported victims are Queensland hospital, a children's cancer association an anti-slavery charity, and many more."

304 comments

  1. Did dirty work for dirty people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    And now you're getting dirty. Go figure.

    1. Re:Did dirty work for dirty people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, .... you are talking about the human smugglers, right?

  2. Not the leaks by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 1

      "But everyone does it!!"

      -cold fjord justifying any action of the US Government's surveillance programs

    2. Re:Not the leaks by intermodal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's the clear strategy of the governments involved to blame the leaks for causing the problems. Failure to give the government a pass on the grounds that it "should have remained secret" makes you a terrorist.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    3. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 2

      And they have plenty of mouthpieces and jingoists to spread such misinformation and propaganda. People like cold fjord are the real traitors of the people not Snowden.

    4. Re:Not the leaks by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      No shit; I mean, what kind of jingoist, fascist asshole blames the guy who risked his ass to bring the evil deeds of clandestine criminal groups into the sunlight?

      *looks at submitter name in summary*

      Ah, that kind.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who is "cold fjord"?

    6. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's clearly the new of the leaks that did it. Last week there wasn't a diplomatic crisis, then the leaks came, and now there is a diplomatic crisis.

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      This just in: mass surveillance of your "allies" pisses them off!

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      Hahaha! Good old cold fjord. Yeah, it wasn't the fault of the people doing the spying it was Snowden's!! Yeah just like it was the fault of the woman being raped because she wasn't dressed in a burqa not that of the rapist, right?

    7. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 3, Informative

      The person who submitted this propaganda piece.

    8. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

      False dilemma trying to appeal to the emotions. Care to try again without the fallacies?

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    9. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL
      LOOOOLLL

      I live in Australia; and I can tell you, these "people smuggling talks" would have done nothing to stop the people smuggling in the first place.

      There are poor as fuck people who want to come to Australia. There are people who have fled [insert civil war here] with buttfuck all who want to come to Australia. Turns out, you try to get on a boat to come to Australia no matter fucking what.

      The period where there were no "refugees" under howard, was a lie. There was just a bunch of sunk boats, or boats so shit they turned around themselves. (I think there was documented evidence of about 5 boats during the "no boats" period). No I am not going to provide you links, if you gave half a shit you would google it yourself. You don't so don't pay lip service to thinking you do by asking for links. (Protip: I found them by googling "Did Howard stop the boats") The answer is "during Howards years there were less boats" (not no boats).

    10. Re:Not the leaks by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it's clearly the new of the leaks that did it. Last week there wasn't a diplomatic crisis, then the leaks came, and now there is a diplomatic crisis.

      Yes, and when your wife finds out that you're cheating on her, it's not your fault for cheating but her fault for finding out. Do you really not see anything wrong with that reasoning?

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      Trust, but verify.

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      No, blame falls entirely on the bad behavior of the Australian Signals Directorate and their lack of trustworthyness.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhhhh, don't tell anyone. See it's just like murdering someone, if no one ever finds the body there wasn't any crime!

    12. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't shoot the messenger It's the fucking moronic lunatics that were spying on their allies and allowing their contractors access to all the information.

      Blame the dumbest country in the universe, the one that gives hundreds of thousands of people full access to super secret information. And act all butt-hurt when someone leaks it.

    13. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, never read who submitted. But I noted an propaganda oddity in the middle of the submission, the out of context mention of the bali bombing. I guess he tried to explain away why the mass surveillance, but haven't Australia been the fifth eye since the 40-50s?

    14. Re:Not the leaks by _merlin · · Score: 1

      That's funny, he actually does try to justify it a few posts down. You beat him to it in fewer words.

    15. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fucking idiot and a horrible person.

    16. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 2

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      I think the more shocking aspect is how much collusion there is with the espionage, not the espionage itself. It's as if there is no separation between the US, UK, Australia, Italy, and Germany intelligence agencies.

      People have been telling about a group trying to create a new world government right under your noses. Not just those "wacky" people like Alex Jones and Gary Allen, but Presidents Kennedy and Eisenhower said the same thing. If you look at the collusion here suddenly all those "wacko conspiracy people" are not so wacko.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    17. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 1

      "It wasn't his fault that he raped her. That slut wasn't wearing her burqa that day and he just couldn't help himself."

      -cd fjord's logic applied to rape cases

    18. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 2

      Not to mention his silly "think of the children!!" part at the end.

    19. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 1

      False dillema is false. One can be against both the retaliation attacks and the spying at the same time.

    20. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if steal something and someone denounces me, that person is clearly the one that should be blamed according to your logic.

    21. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so accustomed to this that I didn't even register that except nothing that the targets seems to be organization that are easy targets because they do not afford high value protection.

    22. Re:Not the leaks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >"But everyone does it!!"

      I don't.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    23. Re:Not the leaks by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I mean, what kind of jingoist, fascist asshole blames the guy who risked his ass to bring the evil deeds of clandestine criminal groups into the sunlight?

      So you disagree with my stand opposing human smuggling and trafficking, the hacking of hospitals, anti-slavery charities, and other NGOs, not to mention opposing the killing by the hundreds of innocent tourists having a nice vacation?

      That weak attempt to discredit someone by claiming they support policies that no rational person would ever support is the best response you can come up with? Shit, I know middle-schoolers with better game.

      And FTR, no, I disagree with your insistence to suck fed cock by laying the blame for their crimes one the one dude who had the fucking hojo's to call them out on it. A point which is likely glaringly obvious to everyone on the planet other than you.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    24. Re:Not the leaks by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your stand encourages human smuggling and trafficking. The less we know about espionage, the more of it will happen. The more espionage that happens, the less international cooperation there will be. The less international cooperation there is, the more human smuggling and trafficking there will be.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    25. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're clearly not looking at this from the perspective of a boot licking coward (cold_fjord).

    26. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you have a stand against humane treatment of refugees.
      All they want to do is immigrate to Australia. You support their being forced to stay in Indonesia with no right to work or education for an indefinite period.

    27. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      No, blame falls entirely on the bad behavior of the Australian Signals Directorate and their lack of trustworthyness.

      You're both wrong. The people to blame for human trafficking are the human traffickers.

    28. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's not a false dilemma - which is pitting one conclusion against another, as if they were mutually exclusive and together exhaust all possibilities.

      Appeal to emotions is the fallacy you want here.

      So: False Dilemma is one fallacy; Appeal To Emotions is another fallacy.

    29. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We would have gotten away with it if it weren't for that meddling Snowden!!"

    30. Re:Not the leaks by Unordained · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, blame falls entirely on the bad behavior of the Australian Signals Directorate and their lack of trustworthyness.

      I don't think we should blame the intelligence agencies for this. You don't install sophisticated interception equipment hidden in architectural features of embassies all over the region, and operate them possibly for decades, without a fair amount of cooperation between branches of the government. The intelligence services did what they were told to do, and in that respect, were plenty trustworthy.

      Back home, we can't really argue that the NSA was out-of-bounds. We elected officials, they passed laws, they appointed secret judges, they signed secret executive orders, and the agencies did everything within their power to gather intelligence that would help us or protect us. Citizens allowed this to happen (in theory -- assumes civilians are in-the-know), and I see the logic that would lead someone to try to get civilian attention with vandalism on charities and whatnot.

    31. Re:Not the leaks by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Quiet diplomacy does not mean "the government does whatever the hell they want, legal or not, and gets a pass".

      I think it's funny that the government thinks it's OK to take our information, but when we get to see their information, they cry like a five year old with a skinned knee.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    32. Re:Not the leaks by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      the more shocking aspect is how much collusion there is with the espionage, not the espionage itself. It's as if there is no separation between the US, UK, Australia, Italy, and Germany intelligence agencies.

      WWII, Cold War, NATO, ANZUS, etc. ECHELON was built in the early 60's, and public knowledge by the late 80's.

      People have been telling about a group trying to create a new world government right under your noses ... Presidents Kennedy and Eisenhower said the same thing.

      Cite or quotation?

    33. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The talks aren't really threatened. All that happened is someone pointed out that the emperor wasn't wearing clothes, now everyone gets to act aghast for all of 5 minutes and then we'll return to our regularly scheduled programming.

    34. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      Much worse than that, Slashdot readers are subjected to your lame attempts at propaganda on a regular basis.

    35. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Human people have emotions! You appeal to...

    36. Re:Not the leaks by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      The "threat" is that these talks will be delayed by a month, while the diplomats put on their "we're so outraged" show, and a few script kiddies hit Australia. These revelations are about as surprising as finding out that the sun rises in the east. It's become comical. Brazil express outrage, oops, Brazil is doing it too (and it's hardly limited to Brazil). The diplomatic protests are just kabuki.

      What outrages me is the domestic spying, including loopholes like comm between two US parties being routed outside the country, or country A spying on the citizens of country B, then reporting it to B (but A did no domestic surveillance!). I don't give a damn about Angela Merkel's privacy, or the head of any other country. I do care about the privacy of the average American, and think citizens of other countries should be concerned about their privacy, especially from their own government.

      I'm curious why Snowden is doing this now. The domestic revelations were very important, and I thank him for them. These foreign revelations are another story. I doubt they do any harm, or at least no more than finding out that the sun rises in the east. But why? Does he think these are a big deal? Does he just want revenge? Or (one to be hoped for) he just wants to keep making noise about the NSA until something is done about the domestic situation. Inquiring minds want to know.

    37. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A professional astroturfer paid by the NSA.

    38. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's clearly the new of the leaks that did it. Last week there wasn't a diplomatic crisis, then the leaks came, and now there is a diplomatic crisis.

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      It's not really a crisis. Australia and Indonesia are just developing their relationship.
      Sort of like when the girl you have been seeing, moves in. You need to set the ground rules.
      To see who is going to control the relationship.

      The leaks that cause the increase in tension come more from Abbott's mouth rather than from Snowden
      (if only Peter Costello had stuck around :(, it would have made such good headlines (The Abbott and Costello Show))
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_and_Costello

      During the election campaign the current the Aust Govt was talking about using Aust Warship to tow back the boats.
      As well as sending operatives into Indonesia to buy boats etc...
      For some reason they thought the Indonesians wouldn't mind uninvited foreign warships in their waters and foreign agents on their soil.

    39. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You oppose anti slavery charities. Of course I disagree with your stance on that.

    40. Re:Not the leaks by Wookact · · Score: 4, Informative

      Speech by Eisenhower warning of Military industrial complex: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY Kennedy warns of shadow/world government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utYcFf93Srs

    41. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Compound fallacies are allowed and not uncommon in propaganda war. What the poster stated was exactly a compound fallacy. If they would have said "child sex trafficking" it would have been more obvious, but the human trafficking due to the leak is the same thing (just less obvious).

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    42. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clearly not the raping of the coma patient that was the problem, it's the waking up of the patient.

      Dumbass.

    43. Re:Not the leaks by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      Actually NEITHER threaten the talks. Indonesia should be interested in their citizens not being enslaved even if the person offering to help them spied of them.

      It's like refusing the fire fighter's help while your house is on fire because you don't like the current mayor. You're mostly just spiting yourself.

      As to indignation. They can give us a break. Every country spies on pretty much every other country. If Indonesia's intelligence agency isn't spying on Australia... it's not for lack of effort I'm sure.

    44. Re:Not the leaks by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're both wrong. The people to blame for human trafficking are the human traffickers.

      The human traffickers are just providing a service for a fee. The real blame should go to legislatures that criminalize the free movement of people.

    45. Re:Not the leaks by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      No, it's clearly the new of the leaks that did it. Last week there wasn't a diplomatic crisis, then the leaks came, and now there is a diplomatic crisis.

      You're absolutely right! It's not that the rapist, in his actions, ruined his life when he was brought to justice. It's all that damn eye-witness' fault! Oh, yea, and damn the justice system*!

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      And one side is entirely violating that confidentially with mass surveillance. Oh, right, oops. That's the issue at hand.

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      I think, in the biz, they call that "blow back". I guess mass surveillance *did* have an effect.

      *In truth, as fucked up as Indonesia's response to the mass surveillance is, it's clear that to some extent they're doing it because part and parcel of dealing with Australia carries a now very clear risk. In the end, Australia now has to work to regain the trust it has lost from its acts. I still say it's wrong for Indonesia to react the way it has because human smuggling/trafficing is more important than that, but to that end it'd be more a point of Indonesia being better positioned to make reasonable (and possible a few unreasonable) demands to further guarantee that that's all that's happening. Sadly, I can only imagine a tit-for-tat from individuals even if Indonesia doesn't pursue activities beyond these goals.

      In any case, Australia is the one who shot their own foot.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    46. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your handle's tainted man. Once upon a time you provided reasonable rational arguments and kept things in context. Then you got carried away and now everyone calls you out the moment you pop up.

    47. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      As far as I can tell, no religious supremicist organisations in Australia had publicly threatened to kill visiting Indonesians. If they did, Australia's government would "spy" on them for the Indonesians. Indonesia's Islamo-fascist citizens threaten to kill Australians and Australia wants to know if their threats are going to be followed through. Also they want to know If they are sponsored by elements of the Indonesian government. The espionage is justified.

      Because every general and his aide in Indonesia skims off the top of the asylum seeker trade they just want an excuse to keep it going. Who cares who drowns after their leaky boat is set on fire in the middle of the ocean.

    48. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      That weak attempt to discredit someone by claiming they support policies that no rational person would ever support

      Those policies or practices are obviously supported by somebody otherwise they wouldn't be happening.

      I disagree with your insistence to suck fed cock by

      I support no such thing.

      laying the blame for their crimes one the one dude

      He was able to commit crimes of his own.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    49. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      So what justification do I use?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    50. Re:Not the leaks by cffrost · · Score: 1

      [I]f you gave half a shit you would google it yourself.

      Protip: I found them by googling [...]

      I give a shit, but I use a web search site that isn't provided by a repeat-violator of privacy laws, and a known NSA/GCHQ-collaborator. They exist — you just need to give a shit about your privacy*: https://prism-break.org/#en (See under "Web search.")

      * Maybe you don't give a shit... I don't know — I'm just letting you know that there are less-intrusive alternatives.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    51. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards. Intelligence operations by the police and security agencies are often important sources for the intelligence necessary to enforce the law and stop human smuggling and trafficking.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    52. Re:Not the leaks by dissy · · Score: 1

      But didn't you just publicly leak the fact that Snowden leaked information?

      Clearly that means the blame for the original crimes falls squarely on your shoulders.

      Not only that, but you are trying to implicate ME in your crimes by making me point out that you are pointing out what Snowden has already pointed out!

      Damn you, now you're even more guilty!

    53. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      It isn't human trafficking, it is human smuggling. The human smuggling is already occurring, it isn't occurring because of the leaks. The leaks have created diplomatic problems that are likely to prevent effective intervention against the smuggling.

      It would be gratifying if you could bother to get it right.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    54. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 2

      The leaks have created diplomatic problems that are likely to prevent effective intervention against the smuggling.

      No, spying on them caused the diplomatic issues. It would have caused diplomatic issues no matter how they found out about it.

    55. Re:Not the leaks by Desler · · Score: 2

      Those policies or practices are obviously supported by somebody otherwise they wouldn't be happening.

      Sure, but not by a rational person let alone the person you responded to.

      I support no such thing.

      Your posts say otherwise, shill.

      He was able to commit crimes of his own.

      His "crime" is no worse than the people who broke segregation laws, etc. Sometimes laws are not just or correct and deserve to be broken for the benefit of the people. Whereas traitors like yourself will justify any misdeed of the government.

    56. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 2

      The leaks have created diplomatic problems that are likely to prevent effective intervention against the smuggling.

      That is still a false dilemma! Did Australia claim that they will no longer prosecute or investigate human trafficking in Australia? (smuggling is a different term for the same thing, don't bother trying to "straw man" the terminology.) Did any other country, including Indonesia, claim that they would no longer investigate or prosecute human trafficking based on the leaks in their own country? The answer to both of those questions is "NO".

      Are you going to somehow claim that Australia can no longer patrol their borders and look for barges shipping refuges into Australia because of the leak? Are you going to somehow claim that Indonesia will no longer investigate outbound boats and floating things because of the leaks? I don't think you would be so poor at debate as to make such a claim, but just in case: The analogy would be claiming that the USA will no longer prosecute drug crimes because Columbia drops a joint venture. Or that the USA can no longer investigate without such a venture.

      Now you could rightly and rationally claim that the joint investigation mentioned will stop, but how much impact does that have? You don't know! It should have almost no impact, or very low impact, assuming that each home country still works within their own respective jurisdictions (see the drug analogy above).

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    57. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I think it's funny that the government thinks it's OK to take our information, but when we get to see their information, they cry like a five year old with a skinned knee.

      Apparently you aren't aware that governments almost universally have powers that ordinary individual citizens don't. Government generally have a monopoly on the legal use of force. They are generally the only ones able to imprison you, or tax you, or formally arrest you, or legally remove your liberty by sending you to prison, and many other powers. By nature of their powers they are often in possession of considerable amounts of confidential information that they have a duty to keep confidential, such as your tax, health, and police records. That is before you get to the question of confidential intelligence information necessary to protect society. It is really quite odd that you fail to recognize that. Do you simply think of the government as your playmate?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    58. Re:Not the leaks by cffrost · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm curious why Snowden is doing this now. The domestic revelations were very important, and I thank him for them. These foreign revelations are another story. I doubt they do any harm, or at least no more than finding out that the sun rises in the east. But why? Does he think these are a big deal? Does he just want revenge? Or (one to be hoped for) he just wants to keep making noise about the NSA until something is done about the domestic situation. Inquiring minds want to know.

      I think it's worth remembering that ever since (or prior to) Russia granted Snowden's request for asylum, the press has been in control of the manner in which Snowden's material is published. No new leaks (by Snowden) was a condition of Russia's for granting his request for asylum.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    59. Re:Not the leaks by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      woosh...

      I do like how you completely distorted the subject of the article and turned it into an anti-snowden rant.

    60. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit, as usual.

    61. Re:Not the leaks by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Didn't realize that - thanks.

    62. Re:Not the leaks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Extraordinary rendition is human smuggling and trafficking (not to mention that said trafficking is also used to enable another crime: torture), and it is conducted by those very same "police and security agencies" that you so vehemently defend - and they would very much prefer to do that in secret so that the public doesn't ask any inconvenient questions.

    63. Re:Not the leaks by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      By nature of their powers they are often in possession of considerable amounts of confidential information that they have a duty to keep confidential

      I guess that is why Snowden went to work for the private sector then (BAH) - to get access to considerable amounts of confidential information...

      That is before you get to the question of confidential intelligence information necessary to perform industrial espionage profitably. FTFY

      It is really quite odd that you fail to recognize that. Do you simply think of the private military industrial complex as your playmate?

    64. Re:Not the leaks by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      Ike was talking about the American defense industry and how congress fed it. JFK was talking about worldwide communism. Arguably the latter was intended to be a "a new world government", but given that we won the Cold War two decades ago, I doubt that's what the GGP was talking about.

    65. Re:Not the leaks by dbIII · · Score: 1

      suddenly all those "wacko conspiracy people" are not so wacko

      Keep telling yourself that 9/11 "truther" if it makes you feel better. How many people would have had to be murdered to cover up your fake crash into the pentagon again? What about that building you keep saying should never have burned so the "guvvamint done it". You are still just a wacko pretending to be important by attaching the title HR gave you to your posts.
      Another thing, Kennedy lied about the missile gap - truly a massive lie - maybe this other fantasy of yours was a lie too?

    66. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      So if you told a drug-kingpin that one of his dealers was talking to the cops, you'd have nothing to do with the dealer's murder (and the subsequent end of the police investigation)?

      Legally speaking you'd probably be fine. For the murder. There might be conspiracy charges, or obstruction charges, tho.

      The thing I hate about groups like Wikileaks isn't what they do in principle. It's that, in practice, they almost never discriminate between reasonable secrecy and unreasonable secrecy. In this case the US isn't actually an Indonesian ally. They aren't an enemy, but they aren't any closer to us then the Chileans or Indians, and they have no reason to expect us to treat them better then we treat those countries. Moreover they're Muslim, which means somebody in Al Qaeda is always gonna be trying to convince them to attack the West, and occasionally they will succeed (see: Bali). You're damn right we're gonna keep an eye on that shit, and the Aussies (who were most of the victims in that Bali Bombing) are gonna help. The US keeping an eye on that shit is (by definition) spying.

      This is the problem with taking your leaks to a journalist. His job is to get eyeballs, and letting the world know about Australia's spies will get him millions of eyeballs. However it will do approximately jack-squat to advance the cause of actually stopping NSA bullshit, and in fact will advance Feinstein's bill to further codify and strengthen said NSA bullshit.

    67. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Context: Bali - What reasons might you spy on Bali?

    68. Re: Not the leaks by mtthws · · Score: 1

      Snowden may be many things, but a whistle blower he is not. If that is what he is, then he could have stopped at the call metadata and prism. I do not understand how talking about us spinning on foreign governments is any thing but being a traitor. It is hard to take his rants about the US being the worst spying country in the world as he gets handled by the FSB.

      --
      "Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform." -- Mark Twain
    69. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Actually the end of list of examples from the story of groups being hacked was about an anti-slavery charity being hacked. Won't you think of the slaves? I doubt it.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    70. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But everyone does it!!"

      -cold fjord justifying any action of the US Government's surveillance programs

      Quit focusing on the US you moron. This was a joint effort involving several nations, they would spy and feed data back to the NSA, and in return the NSA would give them access to stuff they didn't/couldn't touch directly on their own.

      Anyhow the moral of the story is don't use your Embassies and Diplomatic posts for spying or you risk fallout when you (or your partners) get caught doing it. Same goes for planting spies in Human Aid organizations like the Red Cross and Dr's Without Borders- you risk compromising the neutrality of those organizations by doing so.

    71. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is you're blaming the messenger for the actions of the lynch mob, and completely ignoring the fact that there would have been no message or messenger if someone hadn't been fucking up to start with.
      So lay the blame on the people who committed the original fuckup, and also the lynch mob if you choose, but the messenger is the only guy that you really have no grounds to blame at all.

    72. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People have been telling about a group trying to create a new world government right under your noses. Not just those "wacky" people like Alex Jones and Gary Allen, but Presidents Kennedy and Eisenhower said the same thing. If you look at the collusion here suddenly all those "wacko conspiracy people" are not so wacko.

      The New World Order, Illuminati, and other "Shadow Government" conspiracies state that there is a secret one-world government which controls the actual (puppet) governments. Without them being aware, of course.
      This situation is a simple case of intelligence sharing- several nations all supply data to each other. It has nothing to do with controlling any governments.

      The difference between a wacko conspiracy nut and a regular person is the wackjobs consider lack of any evidence for a theory to be proof of the theory.

    73. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These justifications were popular some time ago in defense of China.

      News: Chinese PLA hacks into [country]
      Slashdotters: [country] should have secured their data, it's their fault / everybody else does it / China is looking out for its interests, that's actually smart / etc.

      Why are they suddenly bad?

    74. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apparently you aren't aware that governments almost universally have powers that ordinary individual citizens don't... [such as] confidential intelligence information necessary to protect society.

      Snowden didn't reveal confidential data needed to protect society, he revealed the capacity for dragnet surveillance and the systematic compromise of internet infrastructure. Every reasonable person accepts that governments need to have some secrets, but that license ends where the coverups begin.

      The monopoly granted to government by the people is to be exercised solely on their behalf and with their consent.

    75. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who told Indonesia they're a US ally? I'm quite serious here, every statement I've seen from Obama on the country where he grew up avoids that word very carefully.

      They're a friendly state, and "allied" in the sense that we help each-other achieve certain fairly important tactical goals, but we've got 42 actual Allies. These are countries we are treaty-bound to die for under certain circumstances. In simple practical terms releasing the information that we spy in Indonesia shouldn't surprise anyone. The entire point of having spies is that you use them to spy on people, and if you can't spy on the 3/4 of the world you aren't treaty-bound to protect it was pretty stupid of you to have spies.

      This is actually why the Snowden as traitor thing will simply never go away. No matter what. He could bring George Washington back to life to vouch for him, and nobody who serves the US Government (especially the military) would believe that shit. Some previous leaks advanced the Constitution by stopping mass surveillance. This leak is an attack on the entire practice of spying, and since combat troops find spy-data really useful in their jobs (particularly the bits of their jobs that involve not being killed), Sbnowden will never be able to live this down.

      I don't think that's fair to Snowden. Greenwald is the one making the decisions, and he's clearly decided to go for a) the scoop, and b) attacking the Five Eyes while he still can. I don't blame Greenwald for doing this, it's his job. I don't blame Snowden for being so naive that he wouldn't understand Greenwald's entire job is to out secrets with no regard of whether they should be kept secret.

      But this isn't High School, so fairness is irrelevent. Snowden leaked shit that he really really really should not have, therefore he will be hated everywhere but slashdot.

    76. Re:Not the leaks by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The view that "confidential intelligence information" is cute but the reality is many contractors, mercenaries, companies and senior staff have the same crypto keys to US/UK and Australian to what you somehow view as been gov only "confidential".
      When they exit the gov or are fired the methods stay with them. Whispers to the press, faith groups, other countries, the highest bidder are common.
      The rush for linguists, experts, black sites, the constant ideology of privatisation, basic cash flows in the past 10 years, boondoggles, drone needs and covert operations ensured that what some wish to see as "confidential intelligence information" is now just for sale.
      Thanks to whistleblowers like Snowden and others at least the wider public can find some academic experts and local brands to try and work around the once 'confidential intelligence' joke.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    77. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you know, i had the ignorati in another blog's thread who i listed the 200-some countries of the world, and told the loudmouthed moron to show me "ALL of them" who had splitters in -apparently- over 200 little secret rooms at the att/etc telecommunications choke points...

      will YOU shut up too ? ? ?

      good dog, saying 'they all do it' (which is not even remotely true) is making an equivalence between st kitts paying some hooker a hundred bucks to find out what her john/US foreign service junior shlub said during visits, versus a worldwide panopticon which hoovers up nearly EVERY SINGLE COMMUNICATION ON THE PLANET...

      yeah, 'they all do it'...
      dickless wonder

    78. Re: Not the leaks by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spying on US citizens isn't a disease, it is merely a symptom of the disease. Spying on allied governments is another symptom. Spying on neutral governments is another symptom. Spying on citizens of other nations is yet another symptom.

      The actual disease is, the desire to know everything, and hence, to control everything.

      When you understand what the NSA's goals are, then you begin to understand how much is wrong. When a doctor learns that a patient has sneezes and sniffles, he doesn't stop there to treat the sneezes and the sniffles. He attempts to learn whether the patient has any more symptoms, then he attempts to make a diagnosis. Prism is just one of many symptoms that go into diagnosing the real problem.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    79. Re:Not the leaks by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Preposterous.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    80. Re:Not the leaks by blackest_k · · Score: 2

      Public knowledge of mass surveillance of your "allies" pisses them off!

      It's probable that the government of the day largely shares Interests with its allies, it is less likely the opposition parties are just as supportive of those same Interests.

      I guess a classic example would be American support for the IRA not really popular with its British Allies an obvious conflict of interest.. I can't imagine why America wouldn't be carrying out surveillance within the UK. American Interests such as Cruise missiles on UK soil could be threatened by the results of a general election for example.

      So realistically allies will be spying on allies as well as enemies as such. The problem is the general public will have a less accepting view of this friendly spying and that can influence election results causing a loss of power. in the UK it is usual for a defeated prime minister to stand down as party leader. Pretty common for opposition leaders to be replaced if they fail too. Smaller parties tend to be more forgiving.
        David Cameron will probably lose the next general election and he will be blaming Snowdon for revealing to the public what he knew already if he has any level of Intelligence.

    81. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bwa ha ha ha haaaaaa
      you're an hysterical bot, dude...

      (stewie voice)
      so, how's that working out so far ? ? ?
      hmmm ? ? ?
      got that trafficking about licked, do we ? ? ?
      no mo' hos ? ? ?
      is that it ? ? ?
      no ? ? ?
      maybe just a little dent in the trade ? ? ?
      what's that ? ? ?
      not even a little ? ? ?
      well....

      not for one fucking femtosecond do i think a propagandabot like you gives a shit about human smuggling, etc; it is ONLY something to beat your adversaries over the head about...
      dog damn, you are one sickening human bean...

      art guerrilla
      aka ann archy
      eof

    82. Re:Not the leaks by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Apparently, YOU are unaware that in the United States, CITIZENS have the ultimate power. If/when we get pissed off at the status quo, we can tear down what passes for a government, and shitcan it, then start all over again. It's in the constitution. It is one of our inalienable rights. The power is ours, the power is not Washington's.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    83. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You humping someone's leg for points?

      He is a fucking hero, a bigger hero than you will ever be in your lifetime. Sadly Hitler youth like you will never see it.

    84. Re:Not the leaks by _merlin · · Score: 1

      Why do you take every opportunity you can to blame things on Snowden? What did he do to you? Did he tell your wife about your gay porn fetish or something?

    85. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty certain that neither the Australian Signals Directorate nor the NSA engages in any sort of rendition, and they seem to be part of the topic here.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    86. Re: Not the leaks by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Disease is the PATRIOT act. and none of you are demanding to your congress critter to repeal it. Or telling everyone you know how it's what allows them to do this and more and getting other riles up about PATRIOT.

      That is the answer to fix all of it. Yet everyone here wants to piss in the same bowl of cheerios instead of actually doing anything.

      Get off your asses, spread the word and start writing letters.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    87. Re:Not the leaks by quenda · · Score: 2

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      Yes, it really is the leaks. The Indonesian security services and government would have known of this all along. Australia and Indonesia have never had the coziest relationship. We've been shooting at each other in Borneo, new Guinea and Timor, which neither side wanted to publicise.

      But with the leaks, the Indonesians have to be "shocked, shocked I tell you" for internal political reasons.

      And they would have to start cooperating with Australia before they could stop.

    88. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      No, it's clearly the new of the leaks that did it. Last week there wasn't a diplomatic crisis, then the leaks came, and now there is a diplomatic crisis.

      Yes, and when your wife finds out that you're cheating on her, it's not your fault for cheating but her fault for finding out. Do you really not see anything wrong with that reasoning?

      The analogy doesn't hold.

      You have no right to cheat on your wife, ever. OTOH if countries did not have the right to spy on each-other then there'd be a specific international convention against all spying, and everyone would pretend to take it seriously by (for example) renaming the CIA. Moreover the reason your wife has a right to not expect cheating is that you have a specific legal relationship with her, based on a solemn ceremony. To my knowledge the Indonesians are not formally Austrlia's allies, and I can tell you that they are not US Allies.

      The analogy is probably unfixable because we're not gonna agree on a crime. You think spying is a huge deal, so you might insist on at least cheating-on-long-term-girlfriend. I think it isn't, so I'd say flirting-with-another-woman-when-you've-just-set-up-a-date.

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      Trust, but verify.

      There will probably be more human smuggling and trafficking due to Snowden.

      No, blame falls entirely on the bad behavior of the Australian Signals Directorate and their lack of trustworthyness.

      So the Indonesians went to a negotiating table with a country that has spies, and then they were told those spies do, in fact, SPY; and it's 100% Australia's fault? Except for the bits that are America's fault?

      Don't get me wrong. I don't blame the Indonesian government for walking away. Their public is as naive as everyone-else. But if their government is at all surprised that Australia and the US both use spies it's dumber then paste. The way the US tries to figure out which guys are good guys (and which are bad (or at least which are lesser-of-two-evils) is spies.

    89. Re:Not the leaks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm pretty certain that neither the Australian Signals Directorate nor the NSA engages in any sort of rendition

      How exactly would you know, if everything is secret, and any potentially illegal activity such as rendition is only vetted by an internal secret court?

      As far as NSA goes, I think it's practically a certainty that they have engaged in such practices, since we know for sure that CIA does that. They might not be doing it themselves directly, but rather handing off the names to CIA to reuse the existing infrastructure. If you want to bicker about terminology, okay, so that would be aiding and abetting human trafficking, not human trafficking per se. Big fucking difference.

      In any case, you did not refer to NSA to ASD, but to "police and security agencies" in general. And the thing about this scandal is that, while NSA has been the main target so far, they all benefit from this cloud of secrecy to hide away any clear wrongdoings as well as generally questionable activity.

    90. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Quiet diplomacy does not mean "the government does whatever the hell they want, legal or not, and gets a pass".

      I think it's funny that the government thinks it's OK to take our information, but when we get to see their information, they cry like a five year old with a skinned knee.

      They do have a warrant. You may disagree with the warrant, but they do have it. Moreover they don't have all your information. They don't seem to have access to your gmail account, or the content of your phone conversations.

      OTOH you don't got a warrant. And you have everything.

      Moreover, whereas their data on you doesn't actually seem to do anything, your data on them is also going to Chinese counter-intelligence who now know what the state-of-the-art in US Intelligence is, which means that the odds of Kim Jon-Ung becoming Dictator of All Korea just went up from 0.01% to 0.1%.

    91. Re: Not the leaks by mtthws · · Score: 1

      Blaming the NSA for doing what it's political masters tell it to do is like blaming a gun for shooting something.

      --
      "Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform." -- Mark Twain
    92. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      The mission of the NSA is signals intelligence. Not much room there for rendition.

      The FISA court both lacks the power to, and wouldn't, permit illegal activity. The judges that sit on it are the same judges that sit on other courts, they just rotate through the FISA court. They aren't some secret cabal that throws away the law when nobody is looking.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    93. Re:Not the leaks by poity · · Score: 2

      I think those modding down cold fjord might be overlooking some things. There is the backroom persona for politicians and there is the press room persona. Indonesian politicians are not stupid, and being not stupid they should know, even without evidence, that countries whose interests intersect with theirs, whether supportive or adversarial, will conduct espionage. They also should know that their base of power comes from a fickle and often nationalistic public whose eyes are always on them.

      If we assume that the act of espionage has chilled relations, then it actually speaks of Indonesian naivety and incompetence. It is difficult to believe that national leaders, whose careers are built on guile and exploiting opportunity, would not assume the very same characteristics in their counterparts. So, what this really says is that Indonesian government leaders, fully cognizant of espionage, are doing their best to cover their behinds domestically in light of media focus and to head off popular uproar on the issue. Rather than espionage chilling relations, it is the revelation of espionage has made career-wise politicians take up a tough facade and sooth a resentful public with feigned outrage.

      Think back to the leaked embassy cables a few years ago. It revealed that the Yemeni government had great enthusiasm for US drone strikes inside their borders. They were enthused for a very practical reason -- it allowed someone else to fight internal radical opposition with little cost to themselves. But Yemeni politicians could not show that face to their public, else they would risk destabilization, and so what they said to the press and to the public had to be completely different from how they actually felt.

      There is more than one layer to this onion.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    94. Re: Not the leaks by mtthws · · Score: 2

      In spite of your love affair with snowden and hated of child fjord, the espionage in most of these cases really is not the real problem. All countries really do do it. And even though it is popular to bash the US they really do put a lot more restraints on themselves than most other countries. Most of this is just convenient political posturing.It is kind of amazing the number of "leaks" from other countries doing the exact same stuff. E.g. the NSA did not spy on EU citizens, their own counties did, and then blamed the NSA.

      --
      "Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform." -- Mark Twain
    95. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 2

      The Presidential speeches reference many topics and a main topic. To claim that they don't contain what is written and stated because it's not of the topic you believe to be the main topic is illogical and irrational.

      Further, to claim these guys didn't know what they were writing or saying is also illogical and irrational. These guys spend a lot of time writing and practicing speeches, they have professionals that help them write them, and there is tremendous study of every statement through Philosophical eyes (rhetoric, symbolic logic, etc..). They know exactly what they are stating and why.

      Neither of these guys simply mentioned the conspiracy, they spent large fractions of their speech on them. JFK was a full 1/3rd, Eisenhower was roughly 1/2. Honestly, if you grasp what was just stated you will realize that the only reason to discount the words of these Presidents is to maintain a delusion and prevent cognitive dissonance. Well, that and the majority of people don't know what these guys said, they just took someone's word for it that it was "nothing".

      Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.

      Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.

      But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

      The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

      IV.

      A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

      Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

      Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged i

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    96. Re: Not the leaks by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      The Disease is the PATRIOT act...

      No, that's another symptom.

      The disease is a far too large & powerful US Federal government that barely even pays lip-service to the Constitution and it's limits on government powers, if it's not outright publicly and blatantly mocked by those in office.

      Large enough to build such a hugely expensive monstrosity, too powerful to be stopped by laws or Constitutional limitations, and able to use it's data to destroy anyone, including politicians supposedly in oversight, that don't "play along".

      It's Big Brother powered by the data collection & computer analysis panopticon instead of a telescreen.

      This can only result in a lot of blood and lives lost, no matter if the population revolts against or accepts it's new self-appointed masters and new societal paradigms or not. And, no matter who finally triumphs.

      Either way, the camps and the mass graves will be filled. If history is any indicator, I think it's far too late at this point to walk this back without a fight. It's also a sure bet that huge numbers of people will be imprisoned/killed if the government keeps going in this direction.

      It's whether or not the camps and mass graves last for weeks/months/years with an eventual victory for the people, or decades/centuries/millennia of suffering & death that will be historic in size and scope, that will be decided by whether or not people now decide to stand up and remove the criminals by whatever means necessary and strip the government of a large portion of it's power and wealth, and scrap the panopticon.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    97. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I am going to ask you one last time to stop trolling my posts. Do not respond to this request with more trolling.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    98. Re:Not the leaks by _merlin · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty certain that neither the Australian Signals Directorate nor the NSA engages in any sort of rendition, and they seem to be part of the topic here.

      Yeah, you're sure for now because no evidence of it has been leaked, but when it is leaked, somehow in your mind it will be the leakers' fault and not the agencies engaging in these practices.

    99. Re: Not the leaks by iamwahoo2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that they will need to repeal a lot more than just the Patriot Act at this point. Besides, it is not like operating outside the law has detered these organizations in the past. The only solution is to accept that no government office should be above scrutiny.

    100. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The New World Order, Illuminati, and other "Shadow Government" conspiracies state that there is a secret one-world government which controls the actual (puppet) governments. Without them being aware, of course.

      Wrong mostly, but I'll grant that there are a few exceptions. Most conspiracies state that there are people trying to establish this web and have been in the process for quite a long time, gaining lots of ground because people are ignorant to the conspiracy.

      The difference between a wacko conspiracy nut and a regular person is the wackjobs consider lack of any evidence for a theory to be proof of the theory.

      A word of caution: There are numerous people that deny facts in order to maintain that there are numerous 'wacko conspiracy nuts'. Not many people know who the Bilderberg group is, let alone what they do and where they meet. The CFR, Trilateral Commission, WHO, are never discussed yet have tremendous impact on Governments. People deny recorded words of Bush (both of them), Cameron, and written words of David Rockefeller even when you show them where to find the prints or hear the words.

      When people all around you in power are trying to manipulate your reality, do you really know who is delusional? For the record, I'm not stating either side is right. I'm saying that it should be investigated openly and every tidbit should be scrutinized. There is enough evidence of collusion to give merit to the conspiracy.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    101. Re: Not the leaks by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      The gun isn't composed of sentient beings who exercise free will. The NSA is composed of such beings. Further, those sentient beings make routine requests for funding, continually growing their strength and their abilities. More, the gun doesn't deceive the wielder, keeping information secret, while offering disinformation in testimony and public press releases.

      You analogy simply sucks. The NSA is not an inanimate object, nor are the people who work for the NSA.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    102. Re: Not the leaks by Falconhell · · Score: 0

      No the problem is US populations cowardice, where it has allowed itself to be terrorised that allowed this to happen, quite ironic even with all those guns.

    103. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like reading all of your wife's emails/phone messages, and going through her purse when she is not around. You probably never promised you wern't going to do this, and you might not ever do anything with the info, but try explaining this to her.

    104. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Your posts say otherwise, shill.

      Hmmmm.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    105. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're sure for now because no evidence of it has been leaked...

      No, I sure because that isn't their mission, just like it isn't their mission to inspect fruit at the border or forecast the weather.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    106. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1, Informative

      Speech by Eisenhower warning of Military industrial complex:

      If the so called Military Industrial Complex was all that powerful today, it's share of the economy (%GDP) wouldn't be on the decline towards the lowest level since 1940.

      Defense Budget Priorities: Opting for American Decline

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    107. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The talks between Indonesia and Australia has nothing to do with Indonesian citizens being enslaved. The human trafficking/smuggling that is being talked about is Indonesian smugglers taking asylum seekers from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc and trying to smuggle them into Australia.

      The Australian government is trying to stop asylum seekers from getting on unseaworthy vessels and trying to cross the waters from Indonesia to Australia.

      Australia isn't trying to help Indonesia with anything, Australia is trying to get Indonesia to help them with the problem of asylum seekers trying to enter the country via boats.

    108. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you going to somehow claim that Australia can no longer patrol their borders and look for barges shipping refuges into Australia because of the leak?

      No, but thats not actually the issue. The talks are about what the Australians will be doing after they intercept the boats. The Australian governments policy is to turn the boats back. That would require cooperation with the Indonesians to work. The other policies involve buying boats from Indonesian fishermen so they can't be used for smuggling asylum seekers into Australia, or for paying Indonesians for information on people smuggling. The later doesn't necessarily require Indonesian cooperation, but it would be a pretty bad for international relations if you are doing it without talking to the local government.

      Are you going to somehow claim that Indonesia will no longer investigate outbound boats and floating things because of the leaks?

      Of course thats not the case as well, but that would involve Indonesia actually doing that investigation in the first place. The talks between Indonesia and Australia are to get them to help with these investigations in the first place. Whether the talks would be successful or not (even without the leaks) is another question. But the leaks are hardly helping the matter.

      Effective intervention against the smuggling requires both nations cooperating, just acting in their own jurisdiction isn't effective which is pretty clear if you look at the last six or so years.

      Also human trafficking implies that the people are being sold as goods. They're not. They are just paying money to people with boats to ferry them to Australia instead of waiting in refugee camps for their asylum claims to be processed. Sitting in Australia waiting to be processed is apparently better than sitting in refugee camps elsewhere. Despite the fact that in Australia we put them in detention (or send them to Papua New Guinea as is now the case) while their asylum claims are processed.

    109. Re:Not the leaks by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's perfectly on topic to bring up your earlier posts when you mention "wacko conspiracy people" since it defines where you draw the line.

    110. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The real blame should go to legislatures that criminalize the free movement of people.

      So you're saying that countries should have no control over their own borders, and who is allowed into the country?

      I hear that doesn't always work out well. Still, it would be a convenient way for Australia to become populated by Chinese and Indonesians. Perhaps Australia could even join one of them in union once the native population is outnumbered. I wonder if Australia as a Chinese province would have a period of special rights like Hong Kong?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    111. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    112. Re: Not the leaks by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      No the problem is US populations cowardice, where it has allowed itself to be terrorised that allowed this to happen, quite ironic even with all those guns.

      No, the problem is not one of cowardice. Remember "Let's roll"? The many stories of bravery by 9/11 emergency responders? All the stunning examples of bravery and sacrifice by our young soldiers?

      The problem is the results of a longterm program of propaganda and subversion, destruction of the family unit, destruction of pillars of common moral underpinnings, indoctrination-instead-of-education systems, and other attacks designed to divide, destabilize, encourage illiteracy & ignorance of history, and disenfranchise the population from within, which started at least 60+ years ago.

      Actually, it's roots go back to Woodrow Wilson and Edward Bernays.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

      The US recently officially ended a longstanding ban against domestic use of the US government's foreign propaganda apparatus against US citizens.

      http://rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/

      The government has been carefully and scientifically managing the emotional state of the population for decades, allowing them to gradually "boil the frogs" without a revolt until they are no longer capable of being any serious threat to their grab for ultimate power and control.

      When the impending US economic/monetary collapse and accompanying food and other shortages occurs and causes chaos, I fully expect to see the government launch an attempt to forcibly complete the transformation to a full police state.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    113. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you can suck my cock. Seriously, I can't believe people actually listen to the shit that comes out of your mouth and onto your keyboard. They should probably whipe it off and throw it in the trash, just like the rest of your non-sense.

    114. Re:Not the leaks by XcepticZP · · Score: 1

      And yet people still up mod him regularly. There is strong contingent of pro-hate people that support him on this site, including the editors that approve his dip-stick articles.

    115. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot.

    116. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is at least one thing you got wrong. Majority of citizens of us are in favor of policies you say no rational person would do. I claim at least a portion of that group is rational so your claim is wrong. It would be good actual to realize that some data gathering and retention is justified. It would also do you good if you realized that some people out there use any argument, false or wrong to justify their acts of savagery. This is the world we live in. In seeing things black and white only you do disservice to the cause Snowden was commuted.

    117. Re:Not the leaks by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No it's far more retarded than that. The strategy is for the opposition to blame the current government for ruining relations even though technically they haven't even been in power long enough to have any effect, let alone enact or retract any form of spying.

      All politicians should be shipped off to some deserted island somewhere to rot in the sun.

    118. Re:Not the leaks by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Not much room there for rendition.

      Jesus Christ, you're so wrapped up in your self that you are unable to read or apply basic comprehension.

      As the parent post said:

      If they hand off the information to the CIA who then perform "extraordinary" rendition, then the NSA are aiding and abetting. That's basically as bad.

      They aren't some secret cabal that throws away the law when nobody is looking.

      I really don't get your obsession with the Law. Are you Judge Dredd or something? It doesn't matter if some hack says it's legal from a bench or legislating chamber, it's still massively unethical.

      (Addedum and yeah, I know attaching this will make you ignore the previous paragraph becahse that's how you reply, buy you know thay're the non-secret cabal who throw away the law in plain sight while everyone is looking. E.g. Give data to a 3rd party? No 4th amendment for you!)

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    119. Re:Not the leaks by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      Most likely a small few run many sock puppet accounts, mod point harvesting: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/18/023239/us-military-commissions-sock-puppet-program

    120. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those policies or practices are obviously supported by somebody otherwise they wouldn't be happening.

      I'll try to help you out of your little blunder there by putting emphasis on a keyword you so clearly missed. You're welcome! :)

      That weak attempt to discredit someone by claiming they support policies that no rational person would ever support

    121. Re:Not the leaks by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      Who told Indonesia they're a US ally? I'm quite serious here, every statement I've seen from Obama on the country where he grew up avoids that word very carefully.

      Who said anything about the US surveilling Indonesia? This is about surveillance conducted by Australia.

    122. Re:Not the leaks by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      *sigh*. Because defense, education, social security funding should always be pegged to GDP... facepalm.

      "The share of gross domestic product (GDP) is a rough indicator of the proportion of national resources used for military activities, and therefore of the economic burden imposed on the national economy." It is hardly worth my time pointing this out to you... yet again. We understand why you continue - MIC shills with hat in hand begging for more money, on top of the 700 billion/year it already gets - to protect us of course, We get it.

      Copied from s.petrys post above...

      Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

      Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

      This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

      In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

      We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

      Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960

      Today no war has been declared–and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

      If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

      It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions–by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highl

    123. Re:Not the leaks by hweimer · · Score: 1

      This is actually why the Snowden as traitor thing will simply never go away. No matter what. He could bring George Washington back to life to vouch for him, and nobody who serves the US Government (especially the military) would believe that shit. Some previous leaks advanced the Constitution by stopping mass surveillance. This leak is an attack on the entire practice of spying, and since combat troops find spy-data really useful in their jobs (particularly the bits of their jobs that involve not being killed), Sbnowden will never be able to live this down.

      Would you care to explain this point? As far as I can tell, neither Snowden nor the journalists he has cooperated with have stated anywhere that they want to abolish intelligence practices completely. Nor have they done anything that endangered ongoing operations with imminant risk for human life.

      --
      OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software
    124. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get off your asses, spread the word and start writing letters

      Obligatory Team America Quote: "The UN will be very upset with you! And will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are!".

    125. Re: Not the leaks by ultranova · · Score: 1

      It's whether or not the camps and mass graves last for weeks/months/years with an eventual victory for the people, or decades/centuries/millennia of suffering & death that will be historic in size and scope, that will be decided by whether or not people now decide to stand up and remove the criminals by whatever means necessary and strip the government of a large portion of it's power and wealth, and scrap the panopticon.

      You forgot option #3: the entire country becomes a giant open-air prison. After all, if you can keep everyone under 24/7 surveillance, it's not like you need to explicitly jail them to control them. It's more profitable to leave them nominally free - that way, they still only have the options you allow, but must also compete with each other to fill your coffers in order to get table scraps to eat. Which is pretty much already implemented.

      Why waste iron for chairs when poverty works just as well, and there's nowhere to escape to?

      --

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

    126. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snowden leaked shit that he really really really should not have, therefore he will be hated everywhere but slashdot.

      Maybe in the US. Anywhere else on the planet he'll be welcomed and loved. (Except for some politicians who need to keep up appearances to not upset their rich friend.)

    127. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiet diplomacy is only possible when confidentiality is possible.

      Confidentiality is only possible if nobody is spying on you.

    128. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the disease is bad people who want to kill innocent people for their religion or political ideology.

      When you don't know who is who and they aren't wearing a uniform, it isn't easy figuring out who the bad guys are and when the attacks will happen.

    129. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why Greenwald is the most powerful person right now. He can release whatever he wants, when he wants to dictate foreign policies and cooperation.

      The media isn't supposed to make the news, it is supposed to report on what is happening that can be found out legally.

    130. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indonesia is not the US's ally. State evidence to the contrary. "Being a country" is not a reason.

      As far as spying goes the US has exactly four allies, and everyone in the world knows exactly who they are. Everyone else is a half way decent friend, an occasional, a bedfellow of common convenience.

    131. Re:Not the leaks by pantaril · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that countries should have no control over their own borders, and who is allowed into the country?

      I would appreciate if countries would place people at least on the same level as goods, ie if goods are allowed to freely cross the border, people should be allowed the same. Otherwise free market can hardly work and it's just exported slavery in my opinion.

    132. Re: Not the leaks by Pav · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's good to hear someone say this. I also think we must also believe there are people deeply concerned about this in government, in the NSA and other three letter agencies and in governments and security organisations worldwide. Cynicism is defeatism. We must apply pressure to embolden those fighting this from within.

    133. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse than that.

      Let me regal you of a story. I was sitting in a indian restaurant waiting to pick up my lamb curry and 2 garlic naan. They said 20 mins. I wait 20 mins and go get my food. I get there and am told to wait. There is a *large* party there. So obviously they were a bit swamped. I was bored and eavesdropped. The guest speaker was some kid who had walked across the country.

      He talked about the people he met. The things he saw. Which states to watch out for dogs (Oklahoma btw). However, it was an interesting group who were *very* concerned about climate change. They started peppering him with questions about it. He was no authority on it. He is just some guy who decided to walk around and see all the monuments in the country. Yet he said something very interesting that got me thinking.

      "I would ask people what they think about it". Meaning he cared enough to ask total strangers about this. He said "Many do not care, in fact they say they do what they can but its not that big of a deal".

      What a strange reaction, I have an opinion on it! You would have expected people to at least have an opinion on it one way or the other. But most did not care at all.

      But stop and think about what I just said. I expected people to have an opinion. What if I am forcing my opinion on others? Why do they have to care? They drive a car and go to work and home and the store 1-2 times a week. Thats about it. Yet we here on the internet sit on our glorious self appointed thrones and say "YOU SHALT HAVE AN OPINION". Not only should you have an opinion you need to *act* upon this opinion, and NOW.

      I am thinking more and more there are 3-5 very small groups (maybe 20-50k in size) in our country who are playing power games. They may even believe they are doing the best for everyone. The rest of us are in the middle. They are squeaking so loud they get airtime and the attention of the rest of us. I am also thinking some of these groups have basically taken over our media. They think they are doing the world the a good deed with "if it bleeds it leads". Somehow these groups have created the mentality of "we are right follow us". Some of the groups seem to overlap each other.

      I am not saying this is Illuminati or anything like that. I am saying these people have self organized around ideas they feel is the best course for everyone without ever stopping to say what if I am wrong. They are then forcing everyone else to come along with them. When most could give a rats ass about it. I would even say we should tell them to shove off.

      For example I am a Republican. This has immediately polarized you on your opinion of me. However, stop and think why you are using the words you have against me. Where did you get those thoughts? They are probably not your own. It is propaganda designed to make you think it is your own. Both parties have taken on what I see as a very 'big data'/fear approach campaigning (yet somehow leaving that out when actually governing). Look at the propaganda from both parties. Very targeted scare mongering down to which picture you get on the post card they send you (and there are more than one). Emails tailored to squeeze the most from you. Phone pitches to maximize revenue. The last one is interesting. Had it happen to me this last weekend. They wanted 100 dollars. I told them no. They proposed 80. Then 50 then 25. They were literally trying all the points on the demand curve to test where I was. However, they now have a 'big data' point on me.

      Think how they are using this information. It is not for the greater good. It is a power struggle.

    134. Re:Not the leaks by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Snowden leaked shit that he really really really should not have

      Such as? I haven't heard of one revelation that the world isn't better off now that we know. The same goes for Bradley Manning and Wikileaks. No harm has come to anyone from any of these leaks, and The People know better now what their government is up to. That's a great thing all around.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    135. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 1

      First, you pulled out a single statement from the speech to ignore what was stated. I quoted the majority of the speech above.

      Just as importantly the MIC includes much more than Defense spending, and it should not take much thought to grasp that. The TSA, DHS, CIA, FBI, NSA, ATF, are also parts of the same MIC. The "War on Drugs" and "War on Terror" have increased spending for military operations by insane amounts. General Dynamics may not be making much more money but Halliburton has made hundreds of billions. I won't discuss black budget items which have increased over the years.

      So if you take Eisenhower out of context and ignore the majority of modern spending on militant operations you have a point. Seems like a bizarre way of looking at the world to me, but if you are happy in your delusion go for it.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    136. Re:Not the leaks by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The Australian governments policy is to turn the boats back. That would require cooperation with the Indonesians to work.

      No it does not require cooperation. It may be cheaper if there is cooperation, they may find out who's on the boats with cooperation (criminal vs. refugee) and be able to deliver them to a better agency with cooperation, but it's not "required". The refusal to cooperate does not mean that neither country can enforce their own immigration laws, nor does TFA state that they won't be enforcing their own laws because of the leaks.

      Effective intervention against the smuggling requires both nations cooperating, just acting in their own jurisdiction isn't effective which is pretty clear if you look at the last six or so years.

      Wrong, go back and read what I wrote and compare that to what you just said. It is not required that cooperation exists. The USA prosecutes drug and arms smuggling every day without cooperation with many of the places that are trying to ship in illegal drugs. Even when there is cooperation the US border operations don't change. Most of the coop programs catch acts on foreign land where the US has no jurisdiction which implies that it's removing responsibility from foreign countries at an increased cost to the US.

      Also human trafficking implies that the people are being sold as goods. They're not. They are just paying money to people with boats to ferry them to Australia instead of waiting in refugee camps for their asylum claims to be processed.

      Wrong again! Human slavery would imply that people are being sold as goods. Trafficking implies that people are being moved for numerous reasons, from illegal immigration (refugee) to slavery. The same as "smuggling" which also implies numerous reasons for transporting humans.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    137. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I sure because that isn't their mission, just like it isn't their mission to inspect fruit at the border or forecast the weather.

      You are delusional and/or a shill. My bet is on both. The organizations involved lie about what they do. What they say their mission is is irrelevant. What they have been proven to be doing is relevant. You keep attacking the messenger. You disgust me, cold fjord. You are part of the problem and a glaring example of how an actual non-patriot behaves. Shame on you.

    138. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's be clear, the title is flame bait.
      Let's also be clear that Snowden did a good thing
      Let's also be clear that Indonesia, on the whole, is very corrupt - about the worst country in the region.
      Let's also be clear that Indonesia has a real problem with fundamentalists that call for jihad, who the government "had to protect ", either due to government support, or because of overwhelming support of the community.

      Australia did a bad thing, and 2 wrongs don't make a right ... But, defending a country with a fundamentalist Muslim problem, and saying the leaks are the cause? Bullshit.

      Read a few choice quotes by this guy, very influential in Indonesia,

      http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakar_Bashir

      You'll find the usual vitriol from fundamentalist Muslims, jihad, yanks deserved September 11, etc. this sort of hate speech is common and quite open in many places in Indonesia.

      TL:DR NSA bad. Indonesia already has problem with west because of fundamentalism, not spying. This is one region where Australia keeping an "open eye" is highly advisable.

    139. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's a shill; that's been made clear repeatedly.

    140. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      negative. that's a symptom you idgit. sheesh.

    141. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this shut up; it's seldom that someone senses even a vague impression of the bigger picture and strat's certainly done more than that here.

    142. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. You're going to have to go a lot higher up the chain of command (past the politicians) to identify the real cause of this disease...

    143. Re:Not the leaks by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      Yes, and when your wife finds out that you're cheating on her, it's not your fault for cheating but her fault for finding out

      It's slightly more subtle than that. It's like knowing in the back of your mind that you talk too much, then being told by a third party that one of your friends complained about how annoying you can be.

      Humans relate more successfully by holding some things private. It damages relationships to have all information in the open, even if that information was already known to all parties.

      Diplomacy, and perhaps spying, are the nation state equivalents. People have the expectation that their government should be completely transparent, but this runs counter to the interests of diplomacy and security. I.e. it is not clear that all such behaviour is intrinsically wrong, as your infidelity example suggests.

    144. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Potatoe potato

    145. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop with the -1 trolling when he's obviously not. It makes the discussion harder to read.
      Don't -1 just because you don't like the argument.

    146. Re: Not the leaks by Optali · · Score: 1

      I pity the poor Chinese and you should too... there must already be thousands of them in the hospitals due to the muscle cramps caused by laughing their asses out.

      --
      -- 29A the number of the Beast
    147. Re: Not the leaks by Optali · · Score: 1

      slaves? what have the East Europeans do to these guys? and why is there an organisation against them?
      I personally like slavic chicks a lot!!!

      --
      -- 29A the number of the Beast
    148. Re: Not the leaks by Optali · · Score: 1

      Mate, the "many" stories of bravery by a few guys paid to e brave doesn't mean anything in comparison to a few hundreds of millions.

      --
      -- 29A the number of the Beast
    149. Re: Not the leaks by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Repealing the patriot act will rip out it's teeth and spine. Everything passed after it relied on what damage it did.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    150. Re:Not the leaks by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      Not really, the true threat to these talks is Tony Abbott and the Liberal party's rhetoric.

      He was elected on a platform of xenophobia ("stop the boats") to disguise the fact his party had no real policies. His first act was to proclaim that he would do whatever he wanted to "stop the boats" which included towing them back to Indonesian ports (later watered down to Indonesian waters) and openly stated that he would do this without the permission of the Indonesian government.

      Now who the fuck is surprised the Indonesians have a problem with this?

      Espionage with Indonesia has never been an issue in the past. In fact, they're one of our closest neighbors and trade partners. However our "esteemed" new Prime Minister made it his first act to alienate them.

      Abbott's rhetoric is what got us into this mess yet he still wont give up. I'm not a religious man but I'm praying for a double dissolution (under the Westminster system, when the houses of parliament reach an impasse similar to that which shut down the US govt, both houses are dissolved and a general election is called).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    151. Re: Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The desire to control everything prompts the need to know everything.

      Also, the NSA doesn't have goals. The president, congressmen, etc. have goals. The NSA is simply a tool they use to achieve those goals, like a can opener or binoculars.

      Though the really stupid thing is this article talks about Indonesia and Australia. The US is only cursorily mentioned. So why is this now a debate about US politics?

      Side-funny:

      Indonesia summoned the Australian ambassador, Greg Moriarty

    152. Re:Not the leaks by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the espionage that threatens the talks.

      Yes, it really is the leaks. The Indonesian security services and government would have known of this all along. Australia and Indonesia have never had the coziest relationship. We've been shooting at each other in Borneo, new Guinea and Timor, which neither side wanted to publicise.

      But with the leaks, the Indonesians have to be "shocked, shocked I tell you" for internal political reasons.

      And they would have to start cooperating with Australia before they could stop.

      Howard fixed relations with the Indonesians back in the 90's. It was fine through Howard, Rudd and Gillard. However Abbott fucked it up on day 1 by threatening Indonesian sovereignty (yes, Australian warships dragging vessels into Indonesian ports or waters without permission is a threat to a nations sovereignty).

      You must be one of the fools who swallowed the "stop the boats" rhetoric hook, line and sinker. Thanks to people like you we now have a prime minister with no idea about economics or diplomacy. You failed to realise that the whole "stop the boats" campaign was a ruse to prevent you from thinking about issues that actually do affect Australia. We might fill the MCG with asylum seekers in 30-50 years, however the real threat to Australia will come through Abbott's economic mismanagement costing Australia jobs and investment money by pissing off our trading partners as well as the erosion of workers rights.

      Have you even thought about how much Abbott's idiotic plan will cost in terms of raw Australian Dollars? It isn't cheap to keep the navy out there all the time, for what benefit? What is the actual gain to Australia? Fewer evil brown people (most of which weren't settled here under the Labor govt). At the same time Abbott is increasing middle class welfare whilst claiming we'll pay less tax, how does Abbott indeed to pay for it?

      Forget the boats, we need to stop the Libs.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    153. Re:Not the leaks by gmanterry · · Score: 2

      "But everyone does it!!"

      -cold fjord justifying any action of the US Government's surveillance programs

      You know. When I was young we Americans used to pride ourselves on our moral values. We would talk about the atrocities of war and were proud that the U.S. didn't do that. When I was in the Peace Corps in Africa, we would say how glad we were as Americans that we don't have to bribe officials at customs to get our bags through. We don't have cops stopping cars because they wanted bribes. Those were things that others did but we were better than that. Well, other countries may spy on all their citizens and read their mail, but we used to be better than that. This is where our country has failed. We are all lazy now and want to take the low road instead of the high road. We USED to be better than that. That's what made us special.

      --
      Since when is "public safety" the root password to the Constitution?
    154. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Who told Indonesia they're a US ally? I'm quite serious here, every statement I've seen from Obama on the country where he grew up avoids that word very carefully.

      Who said anything about the US surveilling Indonesia? This is about surveillance conducted by Australia.

      The spying in question was allowing the US to use Australian embassies as spy-bases. Snowden had access to the relevant documents solely because the NSA did some heavy lifting in this particular operation. If it had just been Australia's spy services acting on their own somebody besides Snowden would have to leak it.

    155. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Snowden leaked shit that he really really really should not have

      Such as? I haven't heard of one revelation that the world isn't better off now that we know. The same goes for Bradley Manning and Wikileaks. No harm has come to anyone from any of these leaks, and The People know better now what their government is up to. That's a great thing all around.

      You wouldn't hear much from people harmed by Wikileaks. The regimes that killed/imprisoned/etc. them wouldn't be advertising that it couldn't recognize a threat without a pointer from Assange and they wouldn't be able to advertise this fact. But several Chinese dissidents have been outed by Wikileaks, a couple Zimbabwean Army Generals were charged with treason, an Ethiopian journalist had to flee the country, etc. Obviously Wikileaks itself thinks none of these cases are real, but they don't feel fake. A fake would be both more serious (something that Assange can't claim is fake), and less serious (there would be an improbable rescue by Navy SEALs followed by a speaking tour of the US denouncing Assange).

      As for the harms done by Snowden, did you read this article at all? It revealed a tactic US intelligence uses on US enemies in Asia. US enemies in Asia are not nice, sane, social democrats from Northern European monarchies. They're Kim Jon-Un. We can argue over how much this leak increased the odds of his takeover of South Korea, but the simple fact is that it does make it easier for him to do so.

      Hell, even if you prove that leaking US Tactics magically made US Ally South Korea more secure, I'm not arguing that point. I'm arguing the perception of reality that exists in the heads of people who make policy in the US. And the perception is that there's no Constitutional bar on spying on other governments, that (in legal terms) those governments have no "expectation of privacy," and therefore this act cannot (by definition) be patriotic. Moreover the perception is that this helped Kim Jon-Un quite a bit, so therefore Snowden hurt the entire world with this leak, but cannot claim it was patriotic. The end result is the man is fucked in the US Legal System. Period. He'll get off more lightly then Manning, but that's only because civilian courts are pushovers compared to the military system.

    156. Re:Not the leaks by quenda · · Score: 1

      Nice strawman you've built there! You must be ones of those pedophiles/terrorists I hear about ...

      The "boat people" issue has been used by politicians of all sides as a distraction, but few things affect Australia as much as immigration. A nation is shaped by its people, much more than its geography or resources. Immigration has always been radically changing the country, and decisions made now have far-reaching consequences. Especially refugee intake, and due to their much higher birth rate than the native population, or non-refugee immigrants, there is a multiplier effect.

      But please find someone else to abuse over our government's latest policy idiocy.

    157. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      This is actually why the Snowden as traitor thing will simply never go away. No matter what. He could bring George Washington back to life to vouch for him, and nobody who serves the US Government (especially the military) would believe that shit. Some previous leaks advanced the Constitution by stopping mass surveillance. This leak is an attack on the entire practice of spying, and since combat troops find spy-data really useful in their jobs (particularly the bits of their jobs that involve not being killed), Sbnowden will never be able to live this down.

      Would you care to explain this point? As far as I can tell, neither Snowden nor the journalists he has cooperated with have stated anywhere that they want to abolish intelligence practices completely. Nor have they done anything that endangered ongoing operations with imminant risk for human life.

      There really isn't much to explain.

      99.9% of what intelligence agencies do doesn't directly affect "risks to human life". It's spying to get basic information that allows you to know when to launch an operation that actually does influence those risks. You don't find out that some Arab Sheik is a threat to the US unless you're spying on Arab Sheiks. Since Arab Sheiks are hardly the only threat (the Taliban, for example, aren't Arab), the US has to be able to spy on anyone if it thinks something fishy's going on. Most countries think of themselves as our allies in at least some things (a full 42 are legally "Major Allies"). Most of the world lives in democracies. That means most of our spy operations are gonna happen in countries that aren't unfriendly to us and are democracies. That's where the people of the world are, we haven't pissed off non-Earthers quite yet.

      You can make a good moral case against mass surveillance. To an extent you can make a moral case against spying on the Germans, because they're our ally; but Pakistan is also an ally. And we really need all the info we can get on Pakistan. By the time you get down to Indonesia and Brazil on our friends list you've abolished most spying we do.

    158. Re:Not the leaks by hweimer · · Score: 1

      99.9% of what intelligence agencies do doesn't directly affect "risks to human life". It's spying to get basic information that allows you to know when to launch an operation that actually does influence those risks. You don't find out that some Arab Sheik is a threat to the US unless you're spying on Arab Sheiks. Since Arab Sheiks are hardly the only threat (the Taliban, for example, aren't Arab), the US has to be able to spy on anyone if it thinks something fishy's going on.

      But that's not what is happening right now. The US are spying on everyone, no matter whether there is something fishy going on, there might be something fishy going on, or there is nothing fishy going on. Do you seriously believe that there is any realistic chance that any of the NATO allies is going to launch war or state-supported terrorist attacks against the US in the forseeable future? Do you seriously believe that everyone using Google or Facebook is up to something fishy?

      --
      OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software
    159. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also the author of this piece:

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/11/05/158205/brazil-admits-to-spying-on-us-diplomats-after-blasting-nsa-surveillance

      My guess is that he works for the NSA

    160. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, Hatta! I expect more from people posting these types of articles on Slashdot!

    161. Re:Not the leaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear mr cold fjord,

      I'm curious who you are and what is your motivation behind spreading this FUD ?

      Certainly your sentiments cannot be genuine right ? How much are they paying you ?

      Yes, I always post anonymously so it's only fair to say my name is Tristan Van Berkom and I live in South Korea, you can easily google me and find me... I'm not anonymous but just cant be arsed to join this forum.

    162. Re:Not the leaks by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      The spying in question was allowing the US to use Australian embassies as spy-bases. Snowden had access to the relevant documents solely because the NSA did some heavy lifting in this particular operation.

      Nothing in the article suggests that this is the case, and in numerous media reports and details of the leak itself say otherwise. Why would the US use the Australian embassy? Why wouldn't they use their own? Why would they bother surveiling the Indonesians at all, given that 5 eyes was specifically set up to allow (amongst others) US access to AUS SIGINT covering the SE asian region, under a pact of mutually shared intelligence?

      If it had just been Australia's spy services acting on their own somebody besides Snowden would have to leak it.

      Nonsense. Are you not aware that the Australians share (practically) all of their signal intelligence with the US - and vice versa?

    163. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Are you sure we read the same article?

      The one I read pretty strongly implied that the US was intimately involved in every element of the operation. For example the only base mentioned is described as an NSA Base, even tho it's in Australia. It said what the operation did, and it said the NSA called the shots (the NSA "was less interested in combating climate change than collecting the numbers of Indonesian security officials in case of a future emergency"). The only thing that is solely credited to the Defense Signals Directorate was requesting "an Indonesian linguist was added to the team to monitor and scan communications."

      Presumably Australia's they did contribute something else to this operation, and from the text it's implied it was a fairly even split in responsibilities, but it's pretty clear that the US was a major part of it.

    164. Re:Not the leaks by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      But that's not what is happening right now. The US are spying on everyone, no matter whether there is something fishy going on, there might be something fishy going on, or there is nothing fishy going on. Do you seriously believe that there is any realistic chance that any of the NATO allies is going to launch war or state-supported terrorist attacks against the US in the forseeable future? Do you seriously believe that everyone using Google or Facebook is up to something fishy?

      I'll address your last sentence first:
      The fact that you bring up Facebook and Google shows you have not understood my argument. I am not arguing anything in this thread about that program. In fact I'm taken it as a given that was a bad thing that should never have been done. However just because the NSA did one thing that's bad, that doesn't imply everything it has ever done is bad.

      As for NATO Allies, keep in mind that several of our NATO Allies are in various states of conflict with our other Allies. Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus have been in a bizarre three-or-four-way dispute over the island since the 70s. Argentina is a Major Non-NATO Ally, and their dispute with the British over the Falklands resulted in a war in the 80s. Not to mention the fact that Israel, Jordan, and Egypt are all our Allies and it's very difficult to have good relations with all three at the same time. If Obama says "we can't spy on Germany because they're in NATO and don't kill people," the first thing a Greek/Turk who hasn't conquered Turkey/Greece yet will do is point out he's in NATO and has yet to kill anyone. Then we can't find out his plans to kill millions until he actually implements said plans, because we can't spy on his ass.

      When you've got 42 formal Allies, you're legally obligated to literally go to war for, and scores more countries that think of themselves as Allies (even if they aren't in that 42) you're dealing with almost thousand different bilateral relationships. Each and every one could theoretically turn into a "risk to human life," which means you need a lot of tools. For Merkel the tool is probably going to be not spying because she only shakes people down for money, and she's got the clout to be a huge pain. For Greece/Turkey/Israel etc. that would be a suicidal tool to use, and will eventually lead to risks to human life (even if the humans involved are technically allies of ours, rather then being us).

    165. Re:Not the leaks by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      I really don't get your obsession with the Law. Are you Judge Dredd or something? It doesn't matter if some hack says it's legal from a bench or legislating chamber, it's still massively unethical.

      Do you want to live in a nation of laws, or not? You can always argue about the ethics of an action.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  3. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More US government propaganda and FUD brought to you by cold fjord. Hope they pay you well to be such a whore.

    1. Re:LOL by intermodal · · Score: 1

      The attention is all the pay he ever wanted.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    2. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Guardian is government propaganda? Dude, really!

  4. Anonymous - always first with the reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quick Anonymous! Attack things! Anything! If it's Australian, it's a target.
    It's got nothing to do with the Australian government or intelligence services? Bah, details.

    1. Re:Anonymous - always first with the reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, all those Australians look alike to me. They are all the same, right? (At least they all talk funny....)

    2. Re:Anonymous - always first with the reaction by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Hey, give Anonymous some credit here! At least they're going after Canberra this time and not Vienna!

    3. Re:Anonymous - always first with the reaction by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Queensland isn't Canberra. Frankly I'm surprised they didn't miss and hit New Zealand with accuracy like that.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    4. Re:Anonymous - always first with the reaction by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Hey, give Anonymous some credit here! At least they're going after Canberra this time and not Vienna!

      Well, I fear a situation in which Austria would do something disputable to a country in Asia-Pacific: chances are it will be still Canberra to be attacked.
      (hint: look over the distance between Indonesia and Australia or, respectively, Austria).

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Headline fail. by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Indonesia is threatening to cease cooperation with Australia on human smuggling as a result of further Snowden leaks

    ... Soo, Indonesia was previously helping Australia with their human smuggling operation? In either event, what does having your corrupt officials mismanaging things have to do with ceasing humanitarian endeavors? This is like saying "After we got busted doing evil things, we're going to just go all in on that whole evil thing, while insisting that you spying on us doing our evil things is wrong and you should stop."

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Headline fail. by sd4f · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's basically why Indonesia isn't liking what's happening. The people smuggling trade brings a lot of money into Indonesia; buying boats, bribing police and officials. Cutting it off is going to annoy quite a lot of people.

    2. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to understand that this is the single most effective stick they have to use against Australia, which is mostly Australia's fault. The newly elected Australian government won a significant number of votes by pandering to racists and xenophobes and managed to seriously offend the Indonesian government in the process.

      It also doesn't help that the newly elected Australian government has announced all sorts of plans pandering to racists' fears of "illegal" asylum seekers that would mean cutting humanitarian programs to asian countries.

      Who would have thought that both countries bumbling leaders would slowly make the situation worse?

    3. Re:Headline fail. by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

      Exactly how did they offend them? Australia tells Indonesia that we will be turning Indonesian boats carrying illegal immigrants back out of Australian waters, and we're doing it to protect our sovereignty. What does Indonesia complain about? It complains that by doing this we interfere with THEIR sovereignty! How exactly? Give me a break! Indonesia can like it or lump it, but Australia is part of the commonwealth and part of ANZUS. While they were gaining their much vaunted Independance, we watched as the US helped prevent the Japanese from invading Australia. We rely on our security from our western allies which basically means that we're going to follow the lead of the USA. Indonesia certainly isn't guarding our security. They just don't have our back. They spy on us too. Have a guess which country's embassy got hit with a bomb blast within the last 20 years. Was it the Indonesian embassy in Australia, or the Australian embassy in Indonesia?

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    4. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... the things Australia is complaining about regarding sovereignty are the things Indonesia is complaining about too? Color me surprised! Are Australians so jingoistic that they think they're the only ones who are allowed to complain? Same with the spying. "But they do it too!" doesn't cut it when you're in the middle of a beaten up political mess. The perception of Australians are inherently racist is going to grow more than any impression of indonesians as being inherently corrupt.

      There was also some sort of plan to buy boats from indonesians? I remember reading some "not The Onion" discussion about that on an economics forum. Googling suggests that's been swept under the rug now so perhaps some other bits of sanity might prevail. Still pretty offensive to go around making plans like that at the cost of humanitarian funding without first mentioning it to the other governments involved.

      Also you're saying immigrants when it seems like it's mostly refugees from the stats. Illegal immigrants can already be deported. Refugees aren't the same as illegal immigrants. It doesn't even look like Australia's intake is particularly high.

    5. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indonesia can like it or lump it

      That attitude might have something to do with it.

    6. Re:Headline fail. by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      The people smuggling trade brings a lot of money into Indonesia; buying boats, bribing police and officials. Cutting it off is going to annoy quite a lot of people.

      So the NSA has been sitting on intelligence reports that people are being sold into slavery... and of course dutifully passed this on to the appropriate government agencies who... proceeded to do nothing. And yet the story here is "teh nsa iz evilz!"

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    7. Re:Headline fail. by _merlin · · Score: 1

      There's no slavery involved. In this case "people smuggling" refers to offering passage by sea from Indonesia to Australia to desperate asylum seekers. No-one wants these people. Indonesia doesn't want them adding to the population, and Australia demonises them because it makes good politics to play up to xenophobia. The spying probably has nothing to do with the people smuggling at all, it's just being another excuse not to play ball with the new Australian prime minster Tony Abbott, who has already been doing his best to piss off Indonesia.

    8. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It doesn't even look like Australia's intake is particularly high."

      It isn't, and anybody with half a brain in this country knows that. It's an almost non-issue blown way out of proportion to win votes. A few boats sank on the way to Oz and so the politicians on both sides jumped on the issue to put a stop to it. After all, this is about saving lives...................

    9. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm; we are going to tow the boats back to indonesia.

      These boats have left indonesia seeking asylum in Australia; and are now outside Indonesian waters.

      We can't tow that back any more than we can tow a barge full of shit to indonesia and dump it in their waters.

      The people on the boat aren't indonesian.

      It is 100% legal to request asylum from another country that has signed the conventions australia has signed.

      These legal asylum seekers are being illegally treated.

    10. Re:Headline fail. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The other issue is oil, gas, mining and fishing rights. Indonesia has been understanding to Australian needs in the region over the years on some in return for aid and very unique mil training.
      Indonesia "lumped" it under its colonial masters, Japan, the KGB and CIA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_killings_of_1965-1966 and Australia. The idea that Indonesia really has to take advice is over.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:Headline fail. by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

      They are not being towed back to Indonesian waters. They are being towed out of Australian waters back into International waters. This is despite the shrilling lefties who misrepresented the facts and came up with that soundbite for their own political gain (no surprises there), rather than doing the Australian public a service by stating the facts. . While it is 100% legal to request asylum, THEY ARE NOT asylum seekers UNTIL it has been determined that they have a legitimate claim. UNTIL that is determined, they have still illegally entered Australian waters, whether they have a legal claim for asylum or not. It sounds like you would love to open the floodgates and get EVERYONE to live in Australia.... desirables, legitimate asylum seekers, economic refugee scumbags, and potential criminals/terrorists... but WITHOUT filtering them? Are you mad? It bothers me that the left of Australian politics just can't think a few extra steps ahead in the chess-game without raving like a bunch of lunatics at people who do.

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    12. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The unhinging tone in this post says a lot really.

      I especially like when you talk about "shrilling lefties" before constructing a strawman out of spittle and hyperbole. *slow clap*

      Poe's Law and all that.

    13. Re:Headline fail. by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

      Your reply was completely vague and content empty. The "unhinging tone" says what exactly? Care to specify?

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    14. Re:Headline fail. by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      It is idiotic to claim they are not asylum seekers until they have been granted asylum, is there some part of the word seeker you dont understand? Then again, Abbott supporters aren't noted for their intelligence.

    15. Re:Headline fail. by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

      I think you're really being naieve. Every country places restrictions on who can enter it. Sometimes those governments make the conditions of entry unreasonably high... but as a country, they have a right to do it. Australia does need immigrants, and yes, even genuine refugees count.... BUT you don't let in EVERYONE. At a point it becomes more than you can bear financially and severely affects management of the country. It's just madness to let them ALL in when there is no benefit, and actually a detriment, to doing so. To encourage that and drop your guard - stupidity. To get angry when people point that out to you - mindless. However... If all the hundreds of asylum seekers get to live in your house until they're processed, and you have to pay to look after them when they get to Australia, I'll support that. Already we're stressing the Australian environment with the increased population... and with more people, it will explode exponentially because people don't stop having sex and are careless with condoms in general.... and then what kind of people are breeding? Intelligent people who will contribute positively to society?... or people with zero education falling down the cracks of society? Weigh up the odds... who is more likely to succeed? A little cruelty now, prevents mass disruptions and potentially more violence later. I heard two muslims (clearly refugees) argue over Iraq and Syria in the mall recently. Does Australia really need that sort of socially divisive crap happening over here? Do you want to allow it? Is that a good idea?

      --
      READY.
      PRINT ""+-0
    16. Re:Headline fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Human smuggling" in Australian politik refers to "boat people". AKA "refugees".

      Australia has been using pressuring Indonesia to "stop the boats" as there is a public fear of brown people but no political will to contravene the international convention on refugees.

    17. Re:Headline fail. by sd4f · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not slavery, it's basically illegal migration by claiming to be a refugee. Rather than engage in the orderly process of getting a visa by getting approval of refugee status from the UN, they decide to go to Indonesia, pay a "people smuggler" who will organise things to get them into Australian waters, then ring some government department to send the navy to go pick them up because their little dingy is probably going to sink soon. Before getting picked up, they discard all their identification papers. Once being processed, they claim they're refugees, escaping persecution, ignoring the fact that they would have passed through four or five different countries who aren't persecuting them.

      If they were neighbouring countries, it would be a different matter, but because they're travelling to Australia, I don't think a lot of them are genuine refugees, after all, they're not being persecuted in Indonesia. It's quite a terrible joke what the people smugglers do. If you look on a map to see where 'Christmas Island" is, in relation to Indonesia, you will see why they do it; because it's not ridiculously far from Indonesia and once in Australian waters, our government is compelled to do something. Unlike the US-Mexican border, where many people try to get into the USA and evade detection, in our case, there is absolutely no compulsion to avoid detection, they actually want to be picked up and processed, that way they can get legal entitlements (read: welfare).

      Australia is a well-to-do country, and, while some of the immigrants will be escaping some form of persecution worthy of resettlement, a lot of them are economic migrants who are arriving by boat to avoid having to go through the proper, overly bureaucratic procedures. This is unfair to the people who haven't got the money to pay a smuggler. Apparently it's in the vicinity of ~$AU10,000 that people smugglers charge. It's not an insignificant sum of money.

      With that brief background, my opinion is that the bribing, and general expenses around people smuggling, means that a lot of that cost is parked in the Indonesian economy. A few thousand Australian dollars is a huge amount in Indonesia, considering their largest currency denomination is worth about $AU10. I just get the feeling that the diplomatic problem is that they know it's happening, they know it's wrong, but they're on the beneficiary side to it, so they don't want it to change.

      The NSA has very little to do with this. It's a broader issue with two countries playing politics and politicians trying to win elections. There's that underlying sentiment of the public, and politicians will generally play to nationalistic tendencies, to appear strong. It happened here, and the Indonesians, with an impending election, are doing same.

    18. Re:Headline fail. by TranquilVoid · · Score: 2

      I too, have a suspicion that many of the asylum seekers are simply economic migrants. However I'm sure you've heard the counter-arguments;

      - The neighbouring countries they pass through are not signatories to the UN convention on refugees
      - They are certainly poorly treated (often gaoled) in Indonesia
      - Extended families often pool their money to come up with the $10k to send one member
      - 90% of asylum seekers (who arrive by boat) are found to be legitimate refugees by Australia
      - The chances of being resettled from a UN refugee camp (i.e. the queue) are very small

      All you get are people throwing a bunch of assumptions around. I've yet to see any studies that attempt to categories the real reasons people claim asylum.

    19. Re:Headline fail. by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      I share your concerns about dumb people out breeding smart ones, , but my point was they are asylum seekers from the moment they seek asylum, not as you stated from when their claim was accepted I remember when the same things were said in the past about greeks, Italians and Vietnamese, all of whom eventually turned out well.

  7. 'Human Smuggling' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It should be noted that 'people smuggling' isn't related to slavery; it's the politicised term for the people who help refugees get to Autralia. The efforts to stop people smugglers are about the current Australian government's (xenophobic) anti-refugee policies; they're the result of domestic politics, not a cooperative effort to stop human trafficking.

    1. Re:'Human Smuggling' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, I don't think so. Human "smuggling" aka human trafficking is directly related to slavery/debt servitude of the victims. That's what the 2007 Australia-Indonesia Partnership to Combat Human Trafficking was created to curb by fostering cooperation between Australia's and Indonesia's law enforcement, immigration, an other relevant governmental agencies.

    2. Re:'Human Smuggling' by nukenerd · · Score: 1
      AC wrote :-

      'people smuggling' isn't related to slavery; it's the politicised term for the people who help refugees get to Autralia. [It's] about the current Australian government's (xenophobic) anti-refugee policies

      Cryst, you are naive.

      Human trafficking is mostly about gullible girls being promised good jobs in more prosperous countries but actually being forced into prostitution. They may well be told to claim to be refugees, as also do adventurers who know that this is an almost sure passport to anywhere they want to go, thanks to the existence of so many gullible people like you who believe the bullshit.

      Link

      Why the Indonesian government should be content to see so much of their best womanhood draining away like this is beyond me.

    3. Re:'Human Smuggling' by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Human trafficking and human smuggling are two different things. By definition, the latter is about people who want to go, and who are not being tricked into prostitution or something. Along the US-Mexican border the human smugglers are called coyotes. It's a standard service that's available.

    4. Re:'Human Smuggling' by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Because Cold Fjord wanted to pretend that such a thing was the issue instead of normal refugees passing through Indonesia on the way to Australia. It's a pathetic beatup to push a political agenda.

  8. What day is it today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous is quite busy celebrating Guy Fawkes' Day.

    1. Re:What day is it today? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >Guy Fawkes' Day.

      You mean 'Bonfire Night'.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonfire_Night

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    2. Re:What day is it today? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Read your own reference. As it is Nov 5th, it is "Guy Fawkes Night" in the UK, the traditional term for it.

      I notice that the UK media tends to refer to it as "Bonfire Night". That is merely for political correctness, because historically it was an anti-Catholic night. Guy Fawkes was part of a Catholic plot to assassinate King James I, and it is his effigy- the "Guy" - that is burned on the bonfire.

    3. Re:What day is it today? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      As I remember from spending the first 30 years of my life living in Britain, it was, and still is called Bonfire Night by British people in Britain. The Guy Fawkes thing is British history and anti-Catholicism has pretty much nothing to do with the sentiment of the occasion across the whole of Britain, excepting some communities in Northern Ireland, where the Protestant/Catholic thing is still an issue.

      As with every other country, there is a day where people let fireworks off and set fire to things. In the USA it is July 4th. In the UK it is Nov 5th. For anyone who had their childhood in Britain, Bonfire night is associated with home made toffee, parkin, setting bonfires, lighting fireworks and waving sparklers around. The historical aspects are encoded in tradition, not sectarian hate. The Guy on top of the bonfire is there because that's what people do. A bonfire is incomplete without a Guy. Inertia is a strong force.

      The history bit is addressed in schools. Burning the Guy was an appeal to political correctness specifically because the anti Catholicism of burning a pope's effigy no longer fit in with the dynamic between protestants and Catholics which stopped being a thing a long time ago. They stopped burning effigies of the pope a long time ago. So Guy got to fill in the role, even though he was hung, drawn and quartered.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    4. Re:What day is it today? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      As I remember from spending the first 30 years of my life living in Britain, it was, and still is called Bonfire Night by British people in Britain.

      Must have depended where you lived or in what circle. Around me it was always "Guy Fawkes Night".

    5. Re:What day is it today? by Smauler · · Score: 1

      Heh... I call it fireworks night :).

    6. Re:What day is it today? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      and still is called Bonfire Night by British people in Britain.

      Must have depended where you lived or in what circle. Around me it was always "Guy Fawkes Night".

      I don't think I've ever heard November the Fifth called "Guy Fawkes Night" or "Fireworks Night" more than a couple of times in one day, but "Bonfire Night" all the time, day-in, day-out for weeks at a stretch.

      Where in Britain were you living when you hear it called that? Ulster?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  9. Cut to the chase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every country is spying on every other country, and on every citizen of the world.

    Between Snowden and Manning, the whole thing is like a giant breech of etiquette. Everybody knew the prime minister had a wart on his face. They just never winced and said, "ewwww, look at that ugly thing".

  10. Oh, wait, that's the OTHER Java by MikeTheGreat · · Score: 1

    "Java Cyber Army"? Really? Shouldn't they use the best tools for the job and not restrict themselves to just Java? I mean, Java's cool and all, what with write-once-run-anywhere and the nifty Spring Framework, but-

    -Wait, you mean the other Java, don't you.

    Yeah, ok, that makes more sense. :)

    1. Re:Oh, wait, that's the OTHER Java by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      It's Java, west of Krakatoa.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Oh, wait, that's the OTHER Java by MikeTheGreat · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what I was getting at. :)

    3. Re:Oh, wait, that's the OTHER Java by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does Java even have a cyber army? Are there actually cyber attacks against the coffee plantations?

    4. Re:Oh, wait, that's the OTHER Java by Megane · · Score: 1

      It's the Javascript Cyber Army that you really need to watch out for. I hear the PHP is getting one, too.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  11. Scary headline is disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    When he was questioned about what action Indonesia would take against Australia, the foreign minister [Dr. Marty Natalegawa] said: “One of them obviously is the agreement to exchange information, exchange even intelligence information, in fact, to address the issue of people smuggling."

    Basically, Indonesia is leveraging the disclosures to force Australia to agree to exchange intelligence information to address the problem of human trafficking. Nowhere in the TFA says that Indonesia is going to cancel the talks with Australia over this. Australia broke the trust, its up to them to fix it.

    1. Re:Scary headline is disingenuous by Desler · · Score: 1

      You think cold fjord was trying to actually give accurate info?

    2. Re:Scary headline is disingenuous by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Basically, Indonesia is leveraging the disclosures to force Australia to agree to exchange intelligence information to address the problem of human trafficking. Nowhere in the TFA says that Indonesia is going to cancel the talks with Australia over this. Australia broke the trust, its up to them to fix it.

      It appears you either didn't read the article, or don't understand the diplomatic language being used. Maybe you should try that again.

      Spying row: Indonesia threatens to stop co-operating on people smuggling

      'If Australia feels that there are ways of obtaining information other than the official one then one wonders where we are in terms of co-operation,' says foreign minister Marty Natalegawa ... The Indonesian foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, has escalated the diplomatic row between Australia and Indonesia after revelations about Australia's intelligence gathering activities by suggesting co-operation on people smuggling operations may be reviewed.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    3. Re:Scary headline is disingenuous by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      My suggestion is that you try actually reading the article before littering the forum with comments alternating between snark and false accusations. Maybe try this one. Someone with your intelligence should be able to figure out what is being said.

      Spying row: Indonesia threatens to stop co-operating on people smuggling

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  12. The bad guy by XMark3 · · Score: 1

    This certainly sounds like an attempt to go "Hey! You! Undecided people! Snowden is totally the bad guy because of this! Ignore the other stuff!" Of course, nothing in the real world is ever as simple as (person X) is the bad guy and (person Y) is the hero, but we need a narrative. We need to stick people into archetypal categories with heroes and villains, and episodes/chapters with clear resolutions and unambiguous morals.

    1. Re:The bad guy by Desler · · Score: 1

      When you can't dispute what the person is saying the tried-and-true strategy is to simply use character assassination instead.

    2. Re:The bad guy by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Note the name of the submitter of the article. That's really all you need to know to form an opinion on it.

    3. Re:The bad guy by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      This certainly sounds like an attempt to go "Hey! You! Undecided people! Snowden is totally the bad guy because of this!

      So, are you claiming that the Guardian and Sydney Morning Herald articles are false? The Guardian draws a direct line between the reports and the Indonesian foreign minister's statements.

      Spying row: Indonesia threatens to stop co-operating on people smuggling

      The Indonesian foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, has escalated the diplomatic row between Australia and Indonesia after revelations about Australia's intelligence gathering activities by suggesting co-operation on people smuggling operations may be reviewed.

      Natalegawa made the comments in a press conference on Monday. Guardian Australia reported at the weekend that Australia was spying on Indonesia at the UN climate change conference in 2007, according documents obtained by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.

      It seems to me what is really going on here is that you are trying to blame me in some way for the fallout for Snowden's actions, and those of the Guardian. Do you really understand what is going on?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    4. Re:The bad guy by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Here is what the Guardian said.

      Spying row: Indonesia threatens to stop co-operating on people smuggling

      The Indonesian foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, has escalated the diplomatic row between Australia and Indonesia after revelations about Australia's intelligence gathering activities by suggesting co-operation on people smuggling operations may be reviewed.

      Natalegawa made the comments in a press conference on Monday. Guardian Australia reported at the weekend that Australia was spying on Indonesia at the UN climate change conference in 2007, according documents obtained by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.

      It's pretty straight forward - you might want to read more of the article. Trying to blame me for the fallout from the actions of Snowden and the Guardian is a failing game even if you approve of Snowden's actions. I have no influence over the foreign policy of Indonesia.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    5. Re:The bad guy by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      There is no "fallout from the actions of Snowden and the Guardian". There is fallout from the actions of the Australian intelligence services. It is, indeed, pretty straightforward.

  13. Smash the Australian internet by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 2

    The Java cyber army promised to smash the Australian internet. I doubt they would have to try too hard. It's already pretty terrible!

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:Smash the Australian internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are defacing some websites. Child's play. And like a child acting out, they will be punished.

    2. Re:Smash the Australian internet by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Consider it a stress test. Maybe Australia should even pay them for it.

    3. Re:Smash the Australian internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Java cyber army promised to smash the Australian internet. I doubt they would have to try too hard. It's already pretty terrible!

      With Java in their name...

      1) Do they have to pay Oracle Royalties?

      and

      2) Are they effective seeing how they require an exorbant amount of security updates?

  14. Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by tlambert · · Score: 2

    It should be noted that 'people smuggling' isn't related to slavery; it's the politicised term for the people who help refugees get to Autralia. The efforts to stop people smugglers are about the current Australian government's (xenophobic) anti-refugee policies; they're the result of domestic politics, not a cooperative effort to stop human trafficking.

    It's not actually xenophobia when you attempt to enforce your national borders.

    The situation between Indonesia and Australia is similar to the situation between Mexico and the U.S., where the Mexican government in some cases actually busses illegals to the U.S. border in order to aid their illegal immigartion into the U.S.. While most illegals are economic refugees, the bussing mostly involved "undesirables" in Mexico, which included Mexican criminals, but more frequently were refugees from Guatamala and El Salvador, which Mexico preferred to make "not their problem". PBS did a documentary on this a while back:

    http://www.pbs.org/itvs/beyondtheborder/immigration.html

    The "cooperation" being negotiated in this case is primarily dealing with people using Indonesia as a transit point, and less so export of Indonesian "bad apples", just as with the U.S. (although Indonesia will happily export locally grown Al Qaeda to get rid of them). A significant number of these come from the Middle East, including a large portion of them from Iraq, and to a lesser extent, Lebanon. Here are some examples:

    http://www.niqash.org/articles/?id=3308
    http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920705000600

    One of the agreements being negotiated has been buying unused boats which could be made sufficiently seaworthy to get from Indonesia to Australia:

    http://qz.com/118198/australias-election-frontrunner-thinks-buying-broken-indonesian-boats-will-stave-off-asylum-seekers/ ...but it benefits Tony Abbot's opponents to find ways to undermine that plan as much as possible, and it benefits Indonesian politicians to be complicit in that, and seize on any excuse, lest the illegal immigrant refugees end up stuck in Indonesia instead (Indonesia doesn't want them either). So at this point, it's largely an argument between the mostly empty regions of Australia and the more densely populated regions (analogous to the red state/blue state U.S. division that had Arizona enforcing immigration laws that the U.S. federal government would not).

    So basically, politics, not Snowden.

    1. Re:Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by dbIII · · Score: 1

      but it benefits Tony Abbot's opponents to find ways to undermine

      His opponents are too busy arguing with each other about how they lost to undermine anything. Pull your head in and just pay attention to how the plans were shambolic back of the envelope bullshit that they will fail with no help once they make contact with reality.

    2. Re:Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by tlambert · · Score: 1

      but it benefits Tony Abbot's opponents to find ways to undermine

      His opponents are too busy arguing with each other about how they lost to undermine anything. Pull your head in and just pay attention to how the plans were shambolic back of the envelope bullshit that they will fail with no help once they make contact with reality.

      Oh, that's pretty obvious; it would take a huge amount of payola, buying the hulks for new prices, etc., in order to get the people selling them to put economic pressure on their own government such that Indonesia will happily swallow the refugee problem as their own. It's seriously against their own best interests do the deal, rather than passing on the problem to the next guy, so no deal will happen without overcoming the graft threshold.

      Meanwhile, Snowden is a pretty good scapegoat for not doing it, since it curries favor with the U.S. for everyone involved.

    3. Re:Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      It's not actually xenophobia when you attempt to enforce your national borders.

      Our borders are't threatened.

      Asylum Seekers aren't invading, they are seeking to immigrate by legal means. Our laws are not broken, there is no threat of violence nor damage to our national sovereignty. They are not claiming any of our land as their own, nor taking our women or pillaging our villagers.

      Australia has a set quota of refugees that are treated as part of the annual immigration intake - 40000. Not once during this whole saga have we been forced to accept a single refugee more than that number. Not once. If 40001 refugees turn up, one refugee is settled somewhere else. There is no threat.

      My great uncle flew fighter bombers in New Guinea. He lost his life defending the country he loved - this one. It makes me desperately ashamed to think how craven we've become since those times - his generation faced down the might of the imperial Japanese military in planes made in melbourne of fabric and wood. This generation lies down on their backs and pisses on themselves like an oft beaten cur when a few thousand brown people show up in wooden fishing boats, not a gun nor bayonet amongst them.

      For pitys sake - have a bit of courage.

    4. Re:Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      Australia has a set quota of refugees that are treated as part of the annual immigration intake - 40000

      This is different from my understanding. Australian immigration easily tops 100,000 annually, and the humanitarian intake is separate, not linked. It was 13,000 for years, Gillard increased it to 20,000, Rudd hinted at increasing it to appease the left when he introduced his PNG plan. I assume it's still 20,000 with the new government.

      What is linked, is onshore (boat/plane arrivals) and offshore (the 'queue' in refugee camps) humanitarian arrivals. This link was created by the Howard government and, while possibly fair enough, turns onshore arrivals into 'queue jumpers'.

    5. Re:Politics, not Snowden, and "human smuggling" by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      This is different from my understanding. Australian immigration easily tops 100,000 annually, and the humanitarian intake is separate, not linked. It was 13,000 for years, Gillard increased it to 20,000,

      Yep, pathetically, it could easily be less than 40 000, you are right. In fact, Australia's refugee intake is astoundingly low.

      However just 3441 asylum seekers were given refuge in Australia last year, roughly one per cent of the total migration to Australia during 2009. From http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2011/01/05/glance-who-takes-most-asylum-claims

      The point is, the refugee intake is limited by our participation in a mutual resettlement program. We have the luxury of being able to resettle most of the refugee's who seek asylum in other countries. We are able to limit our own refugee intake by that means - and that means alone. Whether it is ethical to set a limit remains an open question - certainly the low refugee intake, along with the generally cruel and inhumane manner in which refugees are treated by our supposedly egalitarian and fair country is of concern to many, if not most, Australians.

      Participation in that resettlement program depends on remaining under the auspices of the UNHCR and the Convention.

      Rudd hinted at increasing it to appease the left when he introduced his PNG plan. I assume it's still 20,000 with the new government.

      He should have increased it, and so should the present government. The majority of refugees arriving are still from Iraq and Afghanistan - people that we made refugees, through our participation in the failed military adventures of the US from the last decade.

      The last time a circumstance like this occurred was after the Vietnam war, which numbered in the 100's of thousands of refugees. There were some problems. But 30 years on, I doubt there is a single Australian who would change what we did then, who would prefer that the Vietnamese community of Australians were not here. Like many people I have never heard anyone clearly elucidate why this present circumstance should be managed differently.

      What is linked, is onshore (boat/plane arrivals) and offshore (the 'queue' in refugee camps) humanitarian arrivals. This link was created by the Howard government and, while possibly fair enough, turns onshore arrivals into 'queue jumpers'.

      Incorrect

  15. Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lets also be clear what "human smuggling" means in this context: Illegal immigration. Indonesians (and others) trying to enter into Australia illegally by any means possible in search of a better life. The Snowden leaks have exposed how the spy apparatus is being used for industrial espionage. This includes and is not limited to being used to maintain political favor with corrupt Indonesian officials in order to maintain cheap access to resources by Australian and other foreign companies. There are already a few previous examples of such immoral exploitation to the detriment of the poorest classes in this region. Running the spy network being for economic advantage in the region only helps guarantee that people will be forced to immigrate illegally to find a better life.

    1. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets also be clear what "human smuggling" means in this context: Illegal immigration. Indonesians (and others) trying to enter into Australia illegally by any means possible in search of a better life. The Snowden leaks have exposed how the spy apparatus is being used for industrial espionage. This includes and is not limited to being used to maintain political favor with corrupt Indonesian officials in order to maintain cheap access to resources by Australian and other foreign companies. There are already a few previous examples of such immoral exploitation to the detriment of the poorest classes in this region. Running the spy network being for economic advantage in the region only helps guarantee that people will be forced to immigrate illegally to find a better life.

      As usual Cold Fjord propaganda story tries to turn this all around to be the complete opposite...

    2. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Desler · · Score: 2

      When you can't disprove what someone says you simply assassinate their character by lumping them in with pedophiles, terrorists, smugglers, etc. and claim that the discredited person is providing them aid.

    3. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by tdelaney · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is *not* illegal to enter Australia via any means to seek asylum, despite what so many of our politicians say. There are zero "illegal asylum seekers".

      Asylum seekers may well perform illegal acts or use illegal services to get to Australia, but the actual act of coming to Australia to seek asylum is not illegal, whether they come by boat, plane or walk across the ocean floor.

      They may be determined not to be asylum seekers, in which case their continued residence in Australia may be determined to be illegal, but that is separate from the act of coming to Australia to seek asylum.

    4. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      When you can't disprove what someone says you simply assassinate their character

      You do seem to use that strategy a lot.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    5. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by colinjl · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is *not* illegal to enter Australia via any means to seek asylum, despite what so many of our politicians say. There are zero "illegal asylum seekers".

      Asylum seekers may well perform illegal acts or use illegal services to get to Australia, but the actual act of coming to Australia to seek asylum is not illegal, whether they come by boat, plane or walk across the ocean floor.

      They may be determined not to be asylum seekers, in which case their continued residence in Australia may be determined to be illegal, but that is separate from the act of coming to Australia to seek asylum.

      Correct! And there are far more people illegally overstaying tourist and other visas than there are asylum seekers risking their lives in unsafe boats to legally flee persecution.

    6. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Macgrrl · · Score: 2

      Sadly a majority of the population seems to have drunk the 'illegal immigrant' kool aide from the current (and former) Government. Maybe if the refugees called it 'defecting' it would be sexier.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    7. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hysterical, the adolt (sic) equivalent of:
      i am rubber, you are glue...

      you sound tired...

      captcha = enrages

    8. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is likely that many people think that it should be illegal, so they probably care very little about these technicalities. Queue jumping is frowned upon in Australia and the average Australian probably considers those who bypass the legitimate immigration system to be less desirable than those who restrain themselves, choosing to follow the lengthy procedures.

      There are plenty of arguments to be had, but Australia has a fixed immigration quota, so each boat arrival accepted is one less immigrant through other means.

      These are (largely) desperate people, however, so I can't blame them for trying. I may have done the same, in their position. This is hardly as black and white as both sides make it appear, especially with shrinking industry and a future uncertain to be as comfortable as we're accustomed.

    9. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Falconhell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In your case Cold Fjord, character assassination is not needed, you do it so well yourself by your posts, which are becoming an amusing cliche's to everyone these days.

    10. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asylum seekers may well perform illegal acts or use illegal services to get to Australia, but the actual act of coming to Australia to seek asylum is not illegal, whether they come by boat, plane or walk across the ocean floor.

      Great comment, pity it's wrong.

      The actual act of coming to Australia to seek asylum is usually illegal. Migration Act 1958 section 14. Also see s13. Also see s5AA. Basically you need a visa prior to entry.

      Now according to UN 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, Article 31, if you're an asylum seeker and entered Australia illegally, you won't face penalty as long as you declare yourself to the authorities right away and show good cause.

    11. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I liked it better when they were called queue jumpers. The current systems just sounds anti-humanitarian and vilifies asylum seekers. The old name vilified only those seeking asylum by boat and thereby taking places from other people who have been patiently waiting in the queue.

      We are on a race to the bottom. Hell one party this election even raised the question of if we should remain a signatory to the refugee convention...

    12. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by KeensMustard · · Score: 2

      - So in fact, it is not illegal, according to International and Australian law. Thanks for confirming that.

    13. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      Actually, from ABC fact check;

      The verdict: Mr Morrison is correct. Based on the definition set out in the people smuggling protocol, people who have come to Australia without a valid visa have illegally entered the country. That is the case even though these people have not committed any crime, nor broken any Australian or international law.

      Mind you, it is still misleading to use this term when speaking to the general public.

    14. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Dude, shut up about the "Cold Fjord" stuff already. Fine, we get it, you don't agree with him. move on.

    15. Re:Indiustrial Espionage contributes to smuggling by Desler · · Score: 1

      Characterizing you based on your statements is not character assassination. It is simply pointing out reality.

  16. Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position. by sethstorm · · Score: 0

    Given how much terrorism already goes through that part of the world, Snowden's actions only made things worse. This is a clear case where he is shown to desire to cause harm instead of benefit. There is no heroic position in providing information that *will* help terrorists.

    If anything, it means that Australia (and by extension, the US) has(have) a new justification for military action in that part of the country - should Indonesia wish to side with interests hostile with the West. Realistically, Indonesia is probably not going to do anything adverse against Australia beyond saber rattling - they need Australia more than Australia needs Indonesia.

     

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  17. Attacking websites... yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd say that a clarification needs to be made here. From a cursory investigation, via cached repositories, it seems this should be defined as EXPLOITING websites.

    WordPress 3.1.... Joomla 1.5... 2 minutes of work for a twelve year old. Well done Anon Indonesia.. what technical prowess you display.

    Hopefully a wake up call to all those with a web pressence that utilise a CMS to understand that it is an ASSET and as such needs maintenance and TLC in order for it to retain it's value and relevance.

    Re signals intelligence interceptions... just a different means to the same ends that the powers to be use to retain power. Not that I agree, but why is this a suprise, an outrage?

    Perhaps the GenY of Anon Indonesia should look into the acts of their own past governments in the annexation of Timor Leste and the complicity of the USA & Australian governments... this points to much broader reasons to maintain the rage. John Pilger's Death of a Nation is a good place to start - http://johnpilger.com/videos/death-of-a-nation-the-timor-conspiracy

  18. Mod parent up, not down! by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Who would benefit from the lack of a Western presence in Indonesia to counter human trafficking (and the terrorism that comes with it)? It wouldn't be ordinary Australian, Indonesian, or American citizens, but would be human traffickers and terrorists that benefit from a lack of oversight. By asking the question "cui bono?", Snowden's disclosure can be proven to be harmful to ordinary people - in at least this case.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Mod parent up, not down! by Desler · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, what caused harm was the act that was committed not that it was exposed. Stop being an asshat. There would have been no harm at all if the spying had not been done in the first place.

    2. Re:Mod parent up, not down! by jrumney · · Score: 1

      The "western presence in Indonesia" does nothing to stop human trafficking. The Australian human traficking agreement is about Australia trafficking refugees that turn up on their shores to Indonesia where they can be mistreated without so much scrutiny, in exchange for aid money.

    3. Re:Mod parent up, not down! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Let me fix this for you.

      Who would benefit from the lack of a Western presence in Indonesia to counter human trafficking (and the terrorism that comes with it)? It wouldn't be ordinary Australian, Indonesian, or American citizens, but would be human traffickers and terrorists that benefit from a lack of oversight. By asking the question "cui bono?", illegal pervasive surveillance can be proven to be harmful to ordinary people - in at least this case.

    4. Re:Mod parent up, not down! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards. The harm is the human smuggling and trafficking that has been occurring. Intelligence operations provide information necessary to enforce the law and stop the abuse.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  19. Crime doesn't pay by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Except when it extorts things to stop a crackdown on illegal acts.

    Snowden is still a patriot, but Freedom is never free.

    If you don't understand that, realize it's 1984 right now.

    And you're all Serfs.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  20. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only terrorists are the governments.

    We lost a mere few thousand people and we have an all out war on 'terrorism'. In the process we killed off what we were supposedly fighting for... FREEDOM!

    As bas as things are I'd support a dictator over a democracy provided my freedoms were respected.

    Yea- it's a f'd up idea although it can't be much worse than the way democratic systems work.

    Letting the masses vote doesn't work. Having a free media doesn't really work either. Neither of these things have preserved my freedom. They have only eroded it.

  21. Well one problem almost solved by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Here in the US, we've been watching our constitutional freedoms infringed increasingly. I don't like to say "eroded" or "removed" because the constitution doesn't guarantee our freedoms so much as it prohibits the government from infringing on them. So let's always keep in mind what the constitution was written to do. Our freedoms are declared and government is limited. They are breaking the constitution. That's the short of it. And at the moment, we're not seeing anything suggesting they are going to stop. That's one problem that's not getting solved yet.

    But one that the whole world should be concerned about is what the US and others have been doing to the world lately. Thanks not to Snowden (because there are many other whistle blowers telling us the same things) but to the US government itself and all of the attention to the issue it has inexplicably drawn to itself and its activities. If there wasn't such an uproar from government charging him with high crimes, Showden and his trickle of information would be forgotten and complicit nations wouldn't have to pretend to be outraged.

    Well thanks to all of this, the world is seeing what has been going on and the US and many, many US companies and allied nations of the US are all "toxic." Already whole nations are seeking to route around the damaged networks tainted by the US, its allies and business partners. We're seeing polarization of other nations which are resulting in their distancing themselves from the US and its allies. For that matter, the US allies are distancing themselves from the US.

    So the world's problems with the US and its allies are being solved. The middle east can no longer rely on the US to fight for Israel's or Saudi Arabia's interests under ridiculous pretexts. And without the US banking system dragging the world down with its endless watering down of the currency, the rest of the world stands a better chance at a faster financial recovery. So all that is good.

    That just leaves us poor Americans in Soviet Amerika... Please have pity on us and prepare to receive refugees from this former first-world leader? It's going to be a much longer and more difficult road to recovery for the US.

  22. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    There is no heroic position in providing information that *will* help terrorists.

    Any terrorist who was too dumb to realize that this sort of spying was probably going on, is too dumb to worry about.

  23. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Yes. The people who are ACTUALLY doing the dirty deeds are not responsible. The guy with the flashlight showing the world the truth is the real problem. Taking sides in an issue is not justification for military action. If you believe that then you must also believe that Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor is justified because the US was providing weapons to France which was affecting Japan's campaign during WW2 prior to the US's direct involvement. Please don't tell me those are two very different things. They aren't except for which side you are apparently on.

  24. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by dnavid · · Score: 1

    Letting the masses vote doesn't work. Having a free media doesn't really work either. Neither of these things have preserved my freedom. They have only eroded it.

    Relative to what? What freedom did you lose when Democracies began to displace other forms of government? Its fashionable now to think that its the end of the world as we know it, and things might suck relative to an imaginary utopia that exists only in my head, but I wouldn't step into a time machine and trade living today for any other period in time.

    The thing about dictatorships is that the phrase "I would support a dictator" is meaningless: dictators do not need, want, or benefit from your support. That's what makes them dictators.

    Democracies are slow and imperfect because people are slow and imperfect, and often progress comes, as Max Plank observed, when the opponents to progress grow old and die. We fight stupid wars for stupid reasons and thousands of people die unnecessarily, but that pales in comparison to the entire generation of people decimated by World War I. Women have only had the unambiguous federally protected right to vote in the United States for less than a hundred years and for less than half the country's lifespan, and now their vote often decides elections. In one generation popular pressure upon a democracy is having more effect on Freedoms afforded to people of non-heterosexual orientation in the US than in the last hundred years.

    Sure, a dictatorship would have been able to settle these matters much more quickly, but the problem with dictatorships is that they rarely settle these matters correctly.

    A hundred years ago the technology didn't exist for the government to intrude on my privacy to the degree it does today, but a hundred years ago the technology also didn't exist for me to even be meaningfully informed about what the government did to me or around me and discuss it in a public forum. The freedom of information act in the US is only 46 years old. The internet a bit younger. The wide-spread public internet just about twenty years old.

    This is not to excuse the abuses of today. Its to emphasize the abuses of yesterday were diminished or eliminated by people who tried to improve the system recognizing its flaws, not by those who assumed it was irrecoverably broken. The end of slavery in America didn't end all discrimination, but it did end the institution of slavery. That's how progress happens. Every generation makes extremely big mistakes that don't seem like mistakes to all of them. And every successive generation contains the people who will try to reverse those mistakes, but will make their own big mistakes as well. How do I judge whether progress is being made? I ask if there's any other moment in time I would rather live in the history of my country, from 1781 to yesterday, and the answer is no. That's progress.

  25. Indonesia, corrupt and incapable. by sc0ob5 · · Score: 1

    Well it’s clear that Indonesia are incapable of actually preventing terrorist attacks in their own country against not only its own citizens but against foreign nationals. Someone needs perform surveillance.

  26. Your usual justification ... as seen by many ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    ... that everyone does it ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  27. ... in other words ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    When you can't disprove what someone says you simply assassinate their character by lumping them in with pedophiles, terrorists, smugglers, etc. and claim that the discredited person is providing them aid.

    Ain't that the definition of Ad Hominem ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:... in other words ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes taco cowboy expect to see a lot more posted by the usual 'names'.
      The sock puppets have a very clear mission on web 2.0 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-31/document-reveals-official-nsa-talking-points-use-911-attacks-sound-bite
      A lot of good news stories, moral equivalence to help understand US domestic spying and international efforts with a more positive spin.
      Thanks to the good work by Snowden the world now understand the US brands, US junk encryption, junk telco/crypto gov standards, keeping of generations of telco logs and creative re working of the US court systems.
      As for Australia it always knew its role as a client state. In 1945 the first and final debate was had over the role of Australian spying post WW2. Would Australia work on its own efforts as to never be betrayed/reliant on/late/lost/fooled/disadvantaged by "friendly" countries needs again.
      The other option was Australia alone would be full of Soviet agents and never have the scale to look deep into regions (Asia, South America).
      The view was to sign up early with the US/UK and get everything 'new' and 'costly' as shared bases.
      Short term Australia got everything it could have ever wanted in terms of pure data flow.
      Now Australia faces the reality of the networks, software, encryption and hardware imported. Its all expensive back doored junk with the US, UK, contractors and staff having the all the telco keys by default.
      The other aspect for Australia is its military networking is not totally hardened on secure lines - they share with the civilian domestic networks hoping unique domestic codes will be 'good'.
      Now Australia has to patch up its own 'network' - junk by US/UK design and half its own cleared staff beholden to the other countries who sold the junk crypto as been safe.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. Saved by sliding grovel last time by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Last month there was much more of a diplomatic crisis, and then Tony Abbott, Australia's new leader, put in a gold medal performance in the sliding grovel and things calmed down.
    If the Indonesians play this well they can use it to get a great deal of advantage with a not yet functioning new Australian government that needs Indonesian support to deliver their main promise to the Australian voters. However this new thing is really just a minor aftershock related to the real diplomatic crisis a month or two ago.

    1. Re:Saved by sliding grovel last time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tony Abbott is nothing but a walking diplomatic crisis. He pretty well torpedoed the trade negotiations with China (one of our most important trade partners), firstly by sticking an artificial deadline on negotiations, then with his statements about Japan being our best friends in Asia, while tensions between Japan and China rise.

    2. Re:Saved by sliding grovel last time by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Which means he's going to go for the grovel and make concessions that nobody else would have to.
      Consider Mark Vale's performance on the "free trade agreement" with the US that excluded Australian beef, steel, sugar, wheat and I'm sure a few other things but gave the US unlimited access to Australian markets - a consequence of grovelling to get the deal done in time for it to be announced before an election. Then dial it up a notch as more is expected to compensate for the lack of trust and insults.
      Expect more fuckups like Saddam getting bribed by the wheat board with Downer responsible to stop that sort of thing but Downer having thousands of dollars worth of shares in the wheat board. These people have form. Downer may have gone but that's the way these people act without adult supervision and Abbott is not capable of keeping them in line even if he wanted to.

  29. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    There is no heroic position in providing information that *will* help terrorists.

    Publishing a book on electric engineering will help terrorists (they will use it to make bombs). So what? Terrorists are so minor a threat in the grand scheme of things that constantly looking at what can potentially benefit them as a side effect is a very stupid waste of one's time. The important part about Snowden's revelations is that it helps the citizens of all these countries to make their governments truly accountable to them.

  30. It's about reality not lies by dbIII · · Score: 1

    You have misrepresented the issue by using emotive language that is not accurate, for example "human trafficking" and "slavery" to describe normal refugees. Thus I see it not as disagreeing that good is good and evil is evil which appears to be the line that you are pushing to shout down dissent, but instead pointing out that reality is different to how you is is being presented by outright liars with a political agenda to push.
    So it's not about standing against all that is good, it is just about pointing out that cold fjord is lying.

    1. Re:It's about reality not lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "emotive" language that "isn't accurate" is a lot more accurate then calling them refugees. The people who come to Australia via boats generally are not escaping "oppression" or "certain harm or death" in their own countries. Heck, many of them have saved up thousands of dollars per person to pay people smugglers to smuggle them into Australia. They do this because they are told that they will get a free ride to set them up in the country if they actually make it without being caught (which used to be the case, now they tend to either get sent home or put in immigration camps until their case can be heard).

      They could make things a hell of a lot easier for themselves if they just applied for residency and it would probably be cheaper. All they need is a reason why they should be allowed to become residents (like educational or personal reasons). They won't get a free ride though if they go about it this way but they won't get locked up or sent home if they get caught...

  31. Indonesia by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The leaks have created diplomatic problems that are likely to prevent effective intervention against the smuggling.

    Dear Mr. Cold Fjord,

    This is INDONESIA that we are talking about.

    For years (actually, decades) Indonesia never took the issue human trafficking/smuggling seriously. Whether it be human trafficking/smuggling to Australia, to Singapore, to Malaysia, or to any other place in the world.

    Indonesia is a nation which has too many people living on too many island, and the corrupt regime (whether or not it was under Suhartoe or the current one) never place that issue as a top priority.

    Furthermore, Indonesia, as the world's MOST POPULOUS Muslim country, has the obligation to spread Islam to kafir countries such as Australia.

    In other words, EVEN WITHOUT the leaks from Edward Snowden, the human trafficking/smuggling business would still go on, as usual.

    All the so-called "cooperation" from the Indonesian side is utterly absurd from the beginning.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  32. Re:Your usual justification ... as seen by many .. by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    Please, show me the quote in this forum.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  33. Re:sNOwden MUST BE STOPPED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are insane, people like me arent threatening the peace of the world because of snowden, I didn't need snowden to tell my my government was batshit out of control insane.

    Nah, people like snowden are the last gasp before it all comes crumbling down without anyway to fix it except through violence.

  34. Re:sNOwden MUST BE STOPPED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let me be clear whistle-blowers are not threating the peace of the world by speaking truthfully and openly. Were attempting to protect it. By informing people of what is happening.

  35. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by c0lo · · Score: 1

    Realistically, Indonesia is probably not going to do anything adverse against Australia beyond saber rattling - they need Australia more than Australia needs Indonesia.

    You're wrong.
    They don't need to mount a military attack: just turn a blind eye on "people smugglers" and suspend the import of live stock from Australia for 4-5 months.

    I'm still not saying that Snowden is reponsible for this

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  36. Re:Your usual justification ... as seen by many .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice try making other people spread your propaganda.

  37. Australia being the USA lapdog? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    All of this is thin propaganda. Even a short search on the internet will poke a lot of holes in this. I am really surprised that the Australian Govt is actually being a lap dog for the USA in trying to discredit snowden and the leaks. I really hope that Auzzie citizens are up in arms at this.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Australia being the USA lapdog? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't get up in arms about anything, maybe we are too lazy, maybe we think its for the best, i don't know but there arn't any real protests (some if your a minority, and the uni students try some stuff sometimes, but no one listens to them).

  38. FAG 6206bearings picture by FAG6206bearings · · Score: 1

    I have had the same as the author's thinking, also talked about with the surrounding friends, this is indeed a question worth pondering. As a professional bearing businessman, I care about information of FAG 6206bearings picturehttp://www.fagbearings-hk.com/product/FAG-6206-bearings-1705.htmlhave made me feel tired, read more articles like this or point of view, made me benefit a lot.

  39. Man, we have some real issues... by optical_phiber · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... What goes around, comes around... eventually....

  40. This java payback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    smells like something valuable coming from a civet after cleaning, toasting and grinding.

  41. Re:Your usual justification ... as seen by many .. by davester666 · · Score: 1

    Are we talking about murder or speeding?

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  42. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    A dumb terrorist with a suicide vest is still a terrorist with a suicide vest. If he sets if off in the mall by you and your family you'll be dead regardless of his IQ.

    Only 1-2 of each 5 man team on 9/11 was fairly bright. The other 3 were "muscle" to protect the other 2 while they did their work. The fact that 60% of the terrorists on 9/11 weren't brain surgeons didn't seem to hamper them in creating carnage.

    By a similar token, do you take lazy walks late at night in the bad part of town and simply count on the disparity between your education and intelligence to protect you against a gang of high school drop-out? I doubt it.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  43. Re:Indonesia doesn't have any negotiating position by cold+fjord · · Score: 1
    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  44. lack of federal interest in investigating CybrCrim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At the end of the SMH article (last link on submission) there appears a statement that, as an Australian is mildly disconcerting.

    "There appears to be little the victims of these attacks can do. A spokesman for the Australian Federal Police said the agency investigated cyber-attacks launched from overseas only if they were made against government bodies."

    So the feds are basically telling the world to go hard at all our networks except gov. ones. fantastic...

  45. signals intelligence from embassies? by Mirar · · Score: 1

    Isn't that what embassies are _for_?

  46. Is cold fjord an NSA shill? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously. How do we find out? Are those her/his opinions? Or is she/he bing paid for it? Or some messy "in-between"?

    (Yes, I've read through multiple other of cold fjord's post, and the result is... inconclusive. Only in matters Snowden there seems to be a stron bias. But the NSA's not dumb ad they know their psy-ops).

    Is there a better way to know than just good ol' "gut feeling"?

    1. Re:Is cold fjord an NSA shill? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know... All I do know is that there is a nice big red dot beside any of his posts in my Slashdot comments section.... And it isn't from this post, but the combination of so many of his shillish posts that I gave up reading anything he writes, they are just too mind numbingly biased.

    2. Re:Is cold fjord an NSA shill? by benjfowler · · Score: 1

      By 'biased', are you implying that he's in a role where he has to be even-handed (e.g. a journalist), but is being opinionated?

      Since when has having an opinion you disagree with, become a crime?

      Please grow up.

  47. It isn't your government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's your politics.

    Aggressive, combative, thoughtless.

    Summed up with Shrub's line "You're either with us or you're with the terrists".

    Summed up again with the teabagger hostage situation.

    Summed up with the insanity of a party whose only promise to their voters is to ensure Obama loses.

    Summed up with Obama whining at the progressives for pointing out the things he said he'd do and did the opposite of.

    Summed up here with your "It's the large government that is at fault". You need a government bigger than the collusion of the corporations can handle. You've put that government in charge of things like this instead.

    1. Re:It isn't your government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of it is because our leaders are chose based on how much money they have and not their IQ or honestly level. Which leads us to having really really stupid leadership with no education and no scruples at all.

  48. Listen to "Holiday in Cambodia" for details by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The people who come to Australia via boats generally are not escaping "oppression" or "certain harm or death" in their own countries.

    So Afganistan, Iraq, Sri Lanka and similar are wonderful places is the people with the guns do not like you? I suggest taking a far more mature attitude instead of writing such childish bullshit. The election is over so we can get back to reality now instead of childish slogans.

  49. Oh, so very wrong. by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    It's not the leaks that threaten these talks. It's the choice to engage in slavery that threatens the talks.
    But hey, if you can find a way to blame it on the USA then you're just dandy.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  50. Buck the consensus at your own peril... by benjfowler · · Score: 1

    Given the roasting that Cold Fjord is getting here, I'm come around to the idea that disagreeing with the consensus on Slashdot is just an exercise in masochism.

    So much for that free exchange of ideas, if you 're only going to cop waves of shrill abuse.