Slashdot Mirror


Hacker Who Aided ISIS Gets 20 Years In Prison (softpedia.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Softpedia: Ardit Ferizi, aka Th3Dir3ctorY, 20, a citizen of Kosovo, will spend 20 years in a U.S. prison for providing material support to ISIS hackers by handing over data for 1,351 U.S. government employees. Ferizi obtained the data by hacking into a U.S. retail company on June 13, 2015. The hacker then filtered the stolen information and put aside records related to government officials, which he later handed over to Junaid Hussain, the then leader of the Islamic State Hacking Division (ISHD). Hussain then uploaded this information online, asking fellow ISIS members to seek out these individuals and execute lone wolf attacks. Because of this leak, the U.S. Army targeted and killed Hussain in a drone strike in Syria in August 2015. Before helping ISIS, Ferizi had a prodigious hacking career as the leader of Kosova Hacker's Security (KHS) hacking crew. He was arrested on October 6, 2015, at the international airport in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, while trying to catch a flight back to Kosovo. Ferizi was in Kuala Lumpur studying computer science.

131 comments

  1. What a fucking idiot. [EOM] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None

  2. World Police? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From Kosovo, arrested in Malaysia, and now jailed in the USA.

    Is every justice system in the world subservient to the American system?

    It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    1. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That much is obvious. Less obvious is why this global security arrangement is not taught in schools? Why do we pretend the world is something else than what it actually is to our children?

      Is there a reason behind the act of sugar coating the world affairs? To keep people happy and ignorant?

    2. Re:World Police? by William+Robinson · · Score: 2

      We have picked up thousands of terrorists from Pakistan, and placed them in Guantanamo bay. What is your point?

      A terrorist does not care who is being killed. I would love to see entire world coming together against them as a single unit, and detain them/punish them under some new international law (making sure nationality, original place of crime etc do not become obstacles.). Otherwise we will be spending time debating norms and they will emerge as winner.

    3. Re:World Police? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Informative

      He hacked into a US company and gave information about US citizens to an unfriendly power for the express purpose of hunting these people down and killing them. Kosovo was apparently content to let him keep flitting back and forth between there and KL indefinitely. The Malaysian authorities apparently weren't. He should be grateful to them for turning him over to the Americans. This means he'll very likely get to live to go home again eventually, instead of doing so in a casket, following an impromptu necktie party.

      Why do you feel the need to make excuses for this character, anyhow?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    4. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The system you speak of already exists; The ICC at The Hague. Curiously, the USA does not allow it's citizens to be subject to that system though.

      One rule for some... another rule for others.

    5. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thousands?? ..Really? you are just a tad off there, maybe do some research first, why didnt you just say millions ,better to be a complete fool than 1/2 a one....
      http://www.closeguantanamo.org/Prisoners

    6. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The opposite is more likely. It makes me anti-american and I think this guy should be behind bars for life.

      The US cannot play both sides and still pretend to be good guys. The US is guilty of more than this guy by orders of magnitude but non-anericans have no standing and no way to seek justice.

      I resent that. It is not acceptable, it will never be acceptable and people will always fight. That is what the US clearly aims for, endless war on other peoples soil to keep your military money flowing.

      So this asshole should go to jail for life but not in US, not by US courts.

      Sooner or later we will all turn against america if it keeps doing what it is doing. This guy turned bad before the rest of our society grew calls to stand IP to imperialusm, and he went to the dark side in frustration. It is an indicator if the future though.

    7. Re:World Police? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Look up: Edward Bernais (nephew of Freud).

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    8. Re:World Police? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Maybe it would be a good plan to put the people that created them in Guantanamo, but not as staff.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    9. Re:World Police? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      He hacked into a US company

      It's this 'US company' that actually put those government employees 'in harms way'.
      What is a merchandise doing with data that can distinguish between government employees and others?
      And why was that data not protected better?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    10. Re:World Police? by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      Government backed credit cards are easily identified. The office heads usually get them to simplify purchasing for custom needs on short notice, and some of the direct reports do as well. Seemingly those aren't the only cases. Of course all use is subject to review but the pay and job security is enough that outright theft by fraud isn't much of a problem.

    11. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're welcome to try and rise up against the US, but I would advise you draw last will and testament first. Oh, sorry, your next of kin will probably collateral. You might want to change your username to "bugsplat". You won't even see it coming. :)

    12. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a merchandise doing with data that can distinguish between government employees and others?

      What are they doing with the first 4 digits of a credit card number you ask?

      They are processing credit card payments of their customers, just like all other vendors in the world.

      How is it the vendors fault that US federal issued credit cards all have the same first four digits?

    13. Re:World Police? by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      The humans are of two types; One who control (type-1); the other who is controlled (type-2). All national boundaries or any other group formation is just to aid type-1. And yes, any information flow is to aid type-1. And yes all programming (of mind) is to aid type-1. Of course it aids type-1 to keep type-2 subservient and hence all system of information flow we have (schools, economy, even internet) exists to aid type-1 if you peel the onion.

    14. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From Kosovo, arrested in Malaysia, and now jailed in the USA.

      Is every justice system in the world subservient to the American system?

      It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

      He engaged in espionage in support of extra-legal lethal targeting of US citizens.

      Those are acts of war and make him legitimately subject to summary execution by US agents. War is not conducted in a courtroom.

      But you seem to hold the US in contempt because the US government was NICE to him and didn't give him a 9mm headache in front of his parents?

    15. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He hacked into a US company

      It's this 'US company' that actually put those government employees 'in harms way'.

      What is a merchandise doing with data that can distinguish between government employees and others?

      And why was that data not protected better?

      Even if what you say is true, that doesn't absolve someone from committing acts of espionage in collecting the data and acts of war in targeting those people.

      Both of those types of acts make whoever performs them a legitimate target of perfectly legal summary execution - just like a soldier on a battle field is subject to summary execution at any moment.

      There is no legal system to protect you when you stick your fingers into the affairs of nation-states and conduct espionage and targeting of a state's citizens.

      You do that, and the nation[s] you fuck with will HORSE FUCK you once they identify you and then deem eliminating you is in their interests. And no law and no court is there to protect you.

      You're an ant. Nations are elephants. Lone ants that fuck with elephants get squashed. Hell, simply getting caught between pissed off elephants is enough to get you squashed.

      Don't like it?

      Move to another planet.

      And don't tell us how "progressives" will improve the lot of ants. "Progressive" nations are the mad, rogue elephants of the world. Look at how the poor ants are faring in Venezuela.

    16. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's OK, he needs no user ID, we already know who he is."

    17. Re:World Police? by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      Yes, except Kosovo is not a state...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    18. Re:World Police? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      That's all true, but that company also shouldn't have had and kept that data on an insecure server.
      Got sensitive data? Delete it or protect it.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    19. Re:World Police? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that clarification, I keep learning here on slashdot.
      Got sensitive data? Delete it or protect it.
      It gets leaked out? You're (partly) responsible.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    20. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

      We can't send a drone to kill him in Kosovo... and he probably didn't wanna travel to places we can send a drone to...

    21. Re:World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      From Kosovo, arrested in Malaysia, and now jailed in the USA.

      Is every justice system in the world subservient to the American system?

      It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

      Well, the internet being what it is, if one can cause Jihadi mayhem in the US sitting in Pristina or Kuala Lumpur, then what's so special about them that they shouldn't be brought to trial in an American court? Especially since what they did was not a violation of either 'Kosovar' law nor Malaysian law.

    22. Re:World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 2

      Point is, Mr/Ms Jihadullah, that people who commit crimes against the US don't get a pass just b'cos they're in another country. Yeah, it would be nice if any country had that sort of overreach, but that would also behoove such countries to be as respectful of individual rights in the same way that the US is. But since they're not, somebody who violates US law can't be treated the same as someone who violates, say, Saudi or Iranian blasphemy laws or North Korean blasphemy laws against the Kims

    23. Re:World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, bigger problem w/ Europeans is that they tend to draw moral equivalencies b/w victims of terror and their perpetrators, in the name of being neutral in conflicts b/w the Israelis and their Jihadist enemies, or b/w the US and its Jihadist enemies. Which is why, if the US accidentally bombs a hospital in Kunduz treating Taliban fighters, that would be treated the same way as ISIS deliberately blowing up the Cedar Sinai Medical Center.

    24. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's all true, but that company also shouldn't have had and kept that data on an insecure server.

      Got sensitive data? Delete it or protect it.

      The hacker shouldn't have gone to prison with such a pretty asshole.

      Got sensitive ass? Protect it.

    25. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like a serial rapist should be qualified to judge people for minor sexual offences.

      Name one area of the globe that has not suffered mass murders/genocide. More like a semi-reformed rapist judging other rapists, if you're going to use a crude analogy.

    26. Re: World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Uh, the US had mostly disarmed and was pretty much minding its own business when 9/11 happened. So you can lose the sophistry about US policies causing the anti-US sentiments. It's usually a blend of Leftist and Muslim hatred against the US, and for that matter, everyone who's successful

    27. Re: World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      All empires eventually fall when the costs to maintain a huge military presence becomes unbearable. We've seen it happen many times, from ancient Persia and Rome to the 3rd Reich and the USSR. Some decay faster than others, but all do. The USA is just the next in line. It may take a few centuries but eventually they will fade into oblivion until a renaissance shakes them up and the cycle continues.

    28. Re: World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      "Minding it's own buisiness" relative to WW2 you mean? They were still meddeling all over the globe. And a few thousands dead happens everywhere due to US "collateral damage", so who cares if a few thousand USAnians die in a heavily provoked reaction?

    29. Re:World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      > The hacker shouldn't have gone to prison with such a pretty asshole.

      Now deliver those NSA spies who hacked into many companies in my country extradited and go to prison for it. And since it seems the new policy of one of your presidential candidates, I suppose we let the US pay for their food too if they want any better than old bread and water.

    30. Re:World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Excepting in the minds of Islamo-pandering cuntries (sic) in Western Europe and the US. Never mind that even the OIC doesn't recognize Kosovo as a state.

    31. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

      No. It seems more reasonable to put a bullet in his head and throw the carcass in a landfill.

    32. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reasonably convinced the fall of the Third Reich had a lot to do with the hard kinetic actions of the Red Army and a supporting cast of brave Brits/Yanks and not a great deal to do with German society becoming economically overstretched.

      Just saying.

    33. Re: World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Let's look at after 1991 or 1992. Aside from the war in Kuwait - which, looking at back today, was a mistake, how many times did the US meddle against Muslim interests? In Yugoslavia, they either ignored the war - during the Bosnian war - or took the Muslim side - when Bill Clinton did his 'Wag the dog' operation. In the Israel-Pali conflict, a lot of pressure was put on Israel to make unilateral concessions, which Ehud Barak actually did. Aside from that, 1992-2000 was a decade of peace as far as the US went, even if there was war in other places in the world, such as Rwanda or Afghanistan (which was a civil war in which the US had no sides since 1987)

    34. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reformed? Algeria, Vietnam, the Suez Canal crisis, Kosovo and now Ukraine... Europe's hands are always bloody.

    35. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right there. That's the problem.

      I don't want anyone to rise up, that is what I think will happen not what I want to happen.
      What I want to happen is to have the US people stand up to the corrupt black hearted bastards that run your country and your military but that will never happen, your response is exactly why.

      So we continue down the path that has only one outcome - global resistance against Americans wherever they go.

      That is the only outcome if you keep stomping on the rest if the planet, literally and figuratively.

    36. Re:World Police? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      It gets leaked out? You're (partly) responsible.

      Yes, but that in no way, shape or form gets the hacker a free pass. An open door does not grant you leave to come inside and make off with the TV

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    37. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again, when it's someone They want to get, all the stops are pulled out and it just happens. They get their man and "justice" is served, quickly and intensely.

      When it's one of their own that's been bad, all of a sudden it's:

      "well, we can't seem to find any laws on the books that they might have broken", or
      "well, he's beyond the reach of our justice system",
      "well, they didn't INTEND to break those laws", and
      "uh, sorry, nuthin' we could do! maybe next time."

      The system is a total fraud.

    38. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, Israel's 'Jihadist enemies', would this be the ISIS who the Israelis are currently co-ordinating with and providing logistical support to ? The same Muslim extremists who Israel are allegedly under continuous threat from but curiously have yet to make a single attack on them despite being just over the border in Syria ? Despite being rabid extremist anti-semites they seem more interested in attacking their fellow Muslims. Grow up an read a history book you ignorant moron. The conflict in the middle east has nothing to do with religion it is about colonialism plain and simple. The majority of Israel's Jewish population being terrorists or the first generation of offspring of terrorist who invaded Palestine coming from Europe, America and the greater middle east largely armed and facilitated by Jewish organizations in the US. The two most significant backers of ISIS are Saudi-Arabia and Israel (always thick as thieves despite being on diametrically opposite poles of the Jew vs. Muslim fairytale created for morons like you), and who is the biggest backer of SA and Israel ? You guessed it, the USA.
      And by the way it is not possible to 'accidentally' continue bombing a hospital for 20minutes after you have received positive confirmation that it is a hospital, and no, international law does not permit the bombing of a hospital no matter who they are treating. Doing so makes you a terrorist, you moron.

    39. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, the US had stopped providing material support and billions in aid to prop up that appalling racist regime in Israel to maintain its illegal occupation and oppression of the native population in Palestine, ? I must have missed that part of history, maybe I was in a coma I was unaware of, when exactly did this happen ?

    40. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were continuously providing billions per annum to prop up that appalling racist regime of Jewish colonists illegally occupying Palestinian and Syrian territory. Any other facts you are ignorant of that you would like clarified ?

    41. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when is Obama going to be hauled into a foreign court to answer for his crimes of killing innocents with the drone strikes he authorized? If a US citizen fires a weapon and hits an innocent, there's hell to pay and people are shouting about banning guns. But when a president does it on a much larger scale, there's almost no discussion of it out outside of "conspiracy theory" websites.

      Face it, the big time murderers and terrorists are untouchable by the legal systems. We're told as we grow up that we are all subject to the same laws, that nobody is above the law, and we have a fair system that works.

      It's not like that though. In the end, might is right. Those in power will do, and those who are not will do as they're told.

    42. Re:World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 2

      Jihadist enemies are there for a lot of countries, not just Israel, so you can get off that camel disguised as a high horse and educate yourself about what they do elsewhere. Aside from Israel, in this thread, I've pointed out how Kosovars/Albanians have issues w/ not just Serbs, but Macedonians as well. Sudan had a civil war that ended in South Sudan becoming a separate country. You have Boko Haram in Nigeria busy persecuting Christians wherever they can find them. Russia has its issues w/ the Chechens and the Crimean Taters, who in their day, conducted raids into Moscow: they weren't just fighting for 'self determination'. In Thailand, there is the issue of Malay separatists in South Thailand. In India, there is the issue in Kashmir, as well as India's own problems w/ its own Muslims. In Philippines, there is the MILF (no, not that MILF, but the Moro Islamic Liberation Front).

      Oh, and the stuff about Israel supporting ISIS - you just made that up. Since the Syrian civil war started, Israel has maintained a stance of neutrality. On one hand, they have Assad, who is backed by Hizbullah and Iran, who they therefore don't like for that reason. On the other, there are the Syrian Sunni groups - of which ISIS is one - that originally were backed by the Muslim Brotherhood, which has ties to both al Qaeda and Hamas, which the Israelis are wary of as well. So they are on record as saying that they have no dog in this fight.

      The internecine Muslim war - the stuff you mention about them being more interested in fighting fellow Muslims - has less to do w/ Israel backing them, and more to do w/ Shia-Sunni rivalry fueled by the Saudis. As it is, the Saudis and other Arabs always took a dim view of Syria's Alawite regime, and wanted to topple it. They got their best chance w/ the Arab Spring, and it was Saudi Arabia and Qatar that started by backing their favorite Sunni factions. Iran couldn't watch Syria collapse just as Iraq had been delivered to them, thanks to the stupidity of the Bush democratization policy, and so they and Hizbullah intervened. Had Syria fallen into the hands of any of the Sunni factions, Lebanon would have followed: there is no way a Sunni regime in Damascus would have tolerated a Hizbullah dominated regime in Beirut. So both Iran and Hizbullah had to prop up the Assad regime. In the meantime, ISIS had overrun northern Iraq and Eastern Syria, so that was a new headache for not just Iran and Syria, but Iraq as well.

      The one good thing about the civil war in Syria is that it's locked up Jihadists from both sides - Sunni and Shia. You have Russia weighing in on Syria's side, which makes it easier to prevent not just an ISIS takeover, but a Sunni takeover as well.

    43. Re: World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Uh, no! If anything, Bill Clinton's was the most anti-Israel administration, before Obama overtook it. He sent James Carville there to orchestrate Netenyahu's electoral defeat, and got Ehud Barak to concede everything that Arafat wanted. You might want to go back to Stormfront and get new Judeophobic material.

    44. Re: World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      When Bill Clinton was president, and busy either trying to engineer the electoral defeat of Netanyahu, and following that, get Ehud Barak to give Arafat EVERYTHING he wanted before the latter declined.

    45. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which "we" do you post on behalf of?

    46. Re: World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      Yes, and Rome was overrun by the Germans who were running for the huns. However, the US is doing well to create more and more wars to wear it down. While no single country might be able to defeat them in any forseeable future, eventually the US will topple under the combined and prolonged war industry.

    47. Re:World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      The Netherlands, where there was a break in at Gemalto, a company that makes gsm simcards and provides them with encryption codes.

    48. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. The reason is you *CAN'T* enforce your laws everywhere as is evidenced by Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and numerous other countries whom aren't cooperative. And you shouldn't be able to yank someone from another part of the world anyway. That's unethical. When you put yourself in 'harms' way [which is what you do when you go online] you need to be accountable for your own security. The government can't fix your computer security problems short of a nanny state, and even then it still won't work as many have pushed.

      People need to take responsibility for themselves. There are a lot of people migrating to New Hampshire to say "no more" to government. Most legislation is sold as being for the people or to benefit society or the poor or whatever. But in reality everything gets written by special interest, industry, and the elite/wealthy for the purpose of benefiting said interests/elite. What we need to do is end government programs and laws where there is no violence short of the law itself. Lets end copy"right", lets end "hacking" laws, lets end government education, lets end social security, lets end welfare, lets end it all. We can contribute to charity as was done in the past and then we'd be able to afford to send our kids to whatever schools we wanted. The reason people are dependant on government for hands outs is because the government steals our money via lots of different forms of tax. The people who "benefit" the most are still paying taxes. Sales taxes, vehicular registration taxes, property taxes (through rents), and so on. We have literally made a good chuck of our society dependant on theft (by government).

      www.freestateproject.org www.freekeene.com www.shiresociety.com www.freetalklive.com

    49. Re: World Police? by johanw · · Score: 1

      In most parts of the world that is called "the least pro-Israel". Compared with others who blindly agreed with everything Israel did.

    50. Re: World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes! Rise up against the evil Americans. I have a better idea. The US should withdraw every single US soldier and military base from around the world. Shit can every mutual defense treaty and only use US military assets for the defense of the US borders and for retaliation strikes against any one looking to attack American interests. This doctrine would include removing any consideration of collateral damage or the killing of non-combatants. Stop all foreign aid. But never stop selling military hardware to anyone who wants it and can afford it. And finally tighten up immigration controls and only admit those with some skill that would benefit the US. Scientists would get to jump to the beginning of the line.

      Probable results: China gains control of SE Asia. Russia reclaims it's lost cold war satellites and then some. Israel would most likely end up turning the surrounding ME into radioactive glass which will make a dent in the pesky terrorists in the area. India and Pakistan would most likely go nuclear because the US would not give a shit.

      People who think the US is evil will get an up close look at some real evil. All of this needs to happen because people have abandoned reason, accepted obscene moral equivalences, and perfected the art of blaming the wrong side on almost every argument.

    51. Re:World Police? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      And you shouldn't be able to yank someone from another part of the world anyway. That's unethical.

      So... After I rob your house, if I can make it to the Canadian border without getting caught, I'm home free, and this is entirely ethical, right?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    52. Re: World Police? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      All Muslim countries agree that Israel shouldn't exist - a view shared on /. While other non-Muslim Third World countries don't have a strong opinion one way or another, but would be perfectly happy to fall in line w/ the Muslim view. What Bill Clinton managed to extract from Israel but not from Arafat was something just short of Israel signing off its existence once it endorsed the 'Right of Return' of refugees who had lived in other countries for 50+ years

    53. Re:World Police? by NewYork · · Score: 1

      Due to bloom.bg/1O04ymn

    54. Re:World Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who's gonna pay for that?? huh?? I say guantanamo his friggin ass until his balls drop! (and at least make sure this dickhead doesn't get out till at least after 120 years, because it's more likely 7 for good behaviour so he can bomb something when he gets out... )

    55. Re: World Police? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      The Third Reich always had ambitions far beyond its capabilities. They didn't have the people or resources to pacify all of Europe and Russia and...

      Their hope was the same as the Japanese -- they wanted to strike quickly and hope that appeasement sentiments from their opposition would allow them to legally retain the new borders they had just created.

    56. Re: World Police? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      If a country has land long enough enough, it becomes THEIRS. Full-stop. I don't give a shit if your grandfather got kicked out of Israel, and you shouldn't either. You have less of a claim to it than the current Israelis do.

  3. Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is reality, crimes have consequences and warfare has no borders because attacks come from everywhere. Too bad this fool couldn't meet a drone too.

    1. Re:Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is reality, crimes have consequences

      Not when committed by the US government.

    3. Re: Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or ride the lightning.

    4. Re:Reality by slashrio · · Score: 1

      'meeting a drone' would have constituted extra-judicial killing. It's appalling that people here seem to condone that.
      I bet you are also against president Duterte of some far-off Asian country extra-judicially killing drug traffickers because the judicial system just doesn't work?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    5. Re:Reality by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      It would help your point if you knew the country - it's not hard to understand the Philippines and why Duerte gained power. His former province under his governorship became the one of the most attractive sites for new business because of increased security. Certainly there are issues with methods but the Phillipines is sovereign and it doesn't matter what a random person on the internet thinks of it.

    6. Re:Reality by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      And of course the proper response to such crimes is to commit more crimes against more innocents in retaliation.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    7. Re:Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, of course not.

      But it is understandable why they do it. They do not have any legal way to handle the US government crimes. So they use crime themselves. The US government is supported by its employees. So the employees are a "legitimate" target for them. A terrorist for one group of people may be "freedom fighter" for another group.

    8. Re:Reality by fnj · · Score: 0

      'meeting a drone' would have constituted extra-judicial killing. It's appalling that people here seem to condone that.

      Cut the shit, clown. If you engage in warfare against the people of my country, you're can be god damned sure my country is going to engage you in return. Hopefully with 1000 times the force.

    9. Re: Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And can you guarantee that this 1,000 x retaliation won't take out innocents ?

    10. Re:Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Define "warfare" please.

      Especially in the context of warfare against a military strategy, e.g. terrorism.

      It seems to me that everyone who is alleged to use violence in the furtherance of a political aim is now considered "at war", so they're no longer a suspect and no longer deserve the rights afforded to suspects under civilian criminal law.

      This seems to me more a way of specifically giving Special Handling to people who oppose the government, even though America faces far greater threats.

    11. Re:Reality by Cederic · · Score: 1

      You have a better recommendation?

      Just what should someone in Afghanistan do when a US drone strike kills her sister? Fucking celebrate?

    12. Re:Reality by slashrio · · Score: 1

      I think you're the clown that you want to put aside the legal protections that made it sure only the guilty get punished, and not everybody that is a suspect.
      You are innocent until guilt is proven. Not 'guilty because some unknown government employee thinks you are', and then comes to kill you, family and friends included.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    13. Re:Reality by slashrio · · Score: 2

      My point?
      My point is that the whole world seems to have problems with Duterte's death squads, in a souvereign country indeed, but don't blink an eye if Obama makes up his weekly kill list.
      Of people in *other souvereign countries.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    14. Re:Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can pretty much guarantee you that orders of magnitude more sisters in Afghanistan have been killed in 'honor killings' by their families than US drone strikes.

    15. Re:Reality by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      Just because it doesn't fit your primary school idea of war doesn't mean we must not address the actions of non-state actors threatening as a group the US and all allies, as well as in cases of Boko Haram and ISIS, etc. those targeting western civilization itself.

    16. Re: Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And can you guarantee that this 1,000 x retaliation won't take out innocents ?

      Thinking like this is why wars still exist.

      Instead, lets guarantee that it WILL take out innocents, lots of them. Give your neighbors incentive to ensure you do not cause harm, lest they share in the retaliation.

    17. Re:Reality by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they "totally deserved it."

  4. What we should do to ISIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuke em till they glow, then shoot em in the dark!

    1. Re: What we should do to ISIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, set them on fire then put the fire off with acid!

    2. Re:What we should do to ISIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Herp, derp, herp derp lets nuke them derp derp derp. Such is the mindset of a child. I hope you die of ass cancer.

    3. Re: What we should do to ISIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, they HAVE rather dishonored the species.

    4. Re:What we should do to ISIS by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Great idea!

      Erh... umm... where should I send the nuke?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:What we should do to ISIS by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      This thread is going places.

      Wish I hadn't already commented, this was a trolling well-constructed enough that it justifies +1, Funny.

  5. Re:Nuke Kosovo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By that metric, the Nazis weren't racist, either.

    Nice try, though.

  6. Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who illegally sift through the data of entire countries and hack the leaders of states get promotions. Apparently it is about who's winning and who's not, not about who's right and who's wrong.

    1. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing sacred about "data". Truth is you have no privacy using public networks, in public spaces, or anywhere except in your home with blinds closed - assuming you are not the target of some investigation.

    2. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are almost no public networks. Unlike the road system, computer networks are almost exclusively private property.

    3. Re:Meanwhile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there are - if access is open to public use it is a public network. Besides "private" isn't a magical word against anything. It just means the owner (not the user) has to enable surveillance. Telecom companies do the surveillance themselves for the most part.

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

      Doesn't change the fact that the surveillance was done illegally, and a lot of the networks aren't open to the public, only to members. But that global scale intrusion doesn't even register with you, does it? Because the people doing it were your guys and you are "winning", so who gives a shit about the foreigners. And let's not mince words here: America hacks global networks with the intention to kill. None of that is legal. If our politicians weren't bought and paid for and had not had their spine surgically removed, they'd stand up to that shit.

  7. 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    20 years is a little bit much for hacking, if I can say so myself.

    1. Re:20 years by NotAPK · · Score: 1

      He definitely would have gotten less time for raping someone. And possible less time for murder, but that varies a lot.

      I agree, 20 years seems disproportionate. I hope he can appeal.

    2. Re:20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      20 years is a little bit much for hacking, if I can say so myself.

      How much for soliciting mass murder? This guy was selecting targets for homicide. How about a year for each real living person he chose for death with the expectation that it would happen?

    3. Re:20 years by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      It's not fair to just look at the act in isolation. Hacking to piss someone off? Meh. Hacking to steal money? Bad, but not critical. Hacking for the specific purpose of getting people killed? Yeah, no, throw that fucking idiot in jail and I don't ever want to see him near computers again.

    4. Re:20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In case anyone else is wondering, he handed over 1,351 names to ISIS, so that means he's been sentenced to around 5.4 days per name. If someone puts my name on an ISIS hit list, I want them in jail longer than 5.4 days.

      Regarding the international aspect: as a non-US citizen, I'm absolutely fine with you guys working with other states to arrest, try and convict people who perpetrated crimes against people in your country. That's how it's supposed to work. Drone strikes in allied nations? Not so much.

    5. Re:20 years by quax · · Score: 1

      Giving material support to ISIS? Seems a very appropriate sentence to me.

  8. Re: subservient justice? by slashrio · · Score: 1

    Is every justice system in the world subservient to the American system?

    Yes, well, no, not *every*. For instance not North Korea, but (as a result, therefore) everybody seems to hate North Korea.
    And of course North Korea will have not right (to nuclear weapons) to defend itself against 'the American System'.

    --
    "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  9. But at least his god loves him by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Because god hate trash, enjoyment, life and people and like everything which is bad and dull.

    1. Re:But at least his god loves him by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So? He'd be the first person whose imaginary friend hates him.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:But at least his god loves him by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Was supposed to be "love trash and hate" or something.. Hadn't really thought it through when I started typing for what it would contain.

    3. Re:But at least his god loves him by aliquis · · Score: 1

      The idea was to suggest god would love him because god supposedly is a complete ass-hole and want at-least the IS supporting Muslims to do bad stuff.

    4. Re:But at least his god loves him by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Every god in the history of mankind has always supported the ideas and actions of those that invented him. Gods and their "commandments" are by definition the mirror of the morals and ideals of the societies that create them.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  10. Guantanamo Bay is a minor issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many members of the Afghan Parliament believe that Pakistan is supporting the Taliban. They are not the only people whom believe that. Local nations are waging a deadly war over Syria.

    al Qaeda cares a lot about not killing civilian muslims.

    1. Re:Guantanamo Bay is a minor issue by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's been one of the issues w/ US policy. Opposed to some Jihadi movements, like the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, Hizbullah, while being supportive of Jihadi governments, like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar. It blows a hole in the war on terror argument. Which is why I prefer the alt Right, that recognizes ALL of Islam as the enemy!!!

  11. No, it's not reasonable by MikeRT · · Score: 2

    Is every justice system in the world subservient to the American system?

    It seems more reasonable to return him to where he committed the crime (Kosovo?) and have him dealt with there, doesn't it?

    Kosovo is a dysfunctional pseudo-state that exists in limbo between two states that don't really want that mess to be integrated into their polities: Serbia and Albania. Serbia is Orthodox Christian and Albania is an extremely moderate predominantly Muslim country. Neither of them are comfortable with ISIS supporters in their backyards. Malaysia sure as heck doesn't want ISIS supporters either. So what you call subservience is rather simply all of the parties involved except Kosovo effectively saying "this guy targeted the US Government, the US Government wants him and we sure as hell don't want him. Let the US Government spend the time and resources to clean this guy's clock."

    1. Re:No, it's not reasonable by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      You realise that Kosovo fought a particularly bloody war of independence against Serbia in the 1990s after the breakup of Yugoslavia and, after a period of protectionism under UN administration, declared independence from Serbia in 2008 - that independence is recognised by 109 UN members, so it is not a pseudo-state, it is a state by recognition, and Serbia would most definitely want Kosovo back if it were to be allowed...

    2. Re:No, it's not reasonable by gtall · · Score: 0

      Serbia wants Kosovo back to finish the job of depopulating it from Muslims and repopulating it with Serbs. Serbia thinks it will make their collective dick look bigger.

  12. General Wesley Clark: ISIS created by U.S. Allies by khz6955 · · Score: 1

    "ISIS got started through funding from our friends and allies... to fight to the death against Hezbollah." ref

  13. Re:General Wesley Clark: ISIS created by U.S. Alli by gtall · · Score: 1

    Sheesh, after all this time you still don't get that everyone in the MidEast is chewing gum and walking at the same time. They all have multiple agendas. Calling something over there this or that in its entirety is simply Western hubris, i.e., if we think this way, everyone thinks this way.

  14. Re:Hw will be pardoned by Obama by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and trump may of been the one to pull the switch on old sparky

  15. needs to be in a fpmita prison by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    fpmita prison and he's lucky that it's not death row

    1. Re:needs to be in a fpmita prison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fpmita prison and he's lucky that it's not death row

      Care to explain why he should be executed or is this just a childish power fantasy statement bereft of punctuation?

  16. Re:General Wesley Clark: ISIS created by U.S. Alli by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "ISIS got started through funding from our friends and allies... to fight to the death against Hezbollah." ref

    You're a dumbass.

    ISIS is Al Qaeda in Iraq

    Read that.

    Look at the ISIS flag - captured in 2008 from Al Qaeda in Iraq.

    Quit trying to cover up the fact that Al Qaeda in Iraq rebounded from the surge because Obama cut-and-ran from Iraq - which is why Obama/Crooked Liar Hillary! have to downplay every damn thing Al Qaeda in Iraq/ISIS does - OBAMA LET IT LIVE.

    Sorry, Obumbles, Al Qaeda in Iraq/ISIS ain't the JV. Yeah, I know you have a lot of sycophants and have fooled a whole lot of, err, fools.

  17. You or family on that list? Re: 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if you or your loved ones were targeted? Because say that your spouse worked @ a military base, as a civilian, and a lone wolf blew off their head going to work one day?

    20 years seem right, still?

  18. Muslims and Serbia by unixisc · · Score: 2

    Kosovo's people are the ones who have problems w/ not just Serbs, but Macedonians as well. It's not like Serbia is the lone bully there. Also, Serbia is expected to part w/ Kosovo on ethnic/religious grounds, but in the meantime, Serbs in Bosnia's Srpska region, which borders Serbia and who wanna join Serbia, can't b'cos the 'international community' is supportive of the Muslim peoples of the region - Albanians and Bosniaks.

    Ironically, all the Jihadi attacks we've seen since 9/11 - had there been attacks from Serb terrorists, I wouldn't call it justified, but they'd at least have had more of a rationale than the Jihadi ones. However, the Serbs have never reacted that way against the US, despite being at the receiving end of a racist, anti-Slavonic campaign by primarily Western Europe, and the US as well. In the US war against Saddam, they supported the US, and in return, the US voted for the independence declaration of Kosovo. When one looks at things in this light, Russia did the only sensible thing by walking into Crimea - there's no way the US or Europe would have supported the aspirations of the Russkies there. But back to my point - one would have expected Serbs to be doing this stuff like hacking US sites in retaliation for the ugly way Serbia has been treated throughout this millenium. Instead, it's a Muslim Kosovar, who has every reason to thank the US but whose Islamic duty of hating the Infidels trumps all that, who does it.

    Funny how US policies of appeasing people like the Albanians, Bosniaks, Palis (pressure on Israel to eliminate settlements), Saudis, Kuwaitis (attack on Chattanooga), Qataris tends to have a blowback effect

    1. Re:Muslims and Serbia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, what you sow, you reap. The chicken are coming home to roost, and all that. Keep appeasing muslims, keep screwing up independent nations, that's what happens. The EU had more than one bloody hand in this mass, and many Europeans now lay dead. Since the EU commission and its ridiculous parliament is not changing its tune, we will see more dead. Not that it will change the mind of the elite, which will enact more and more laws to reduce the individual freedoms of citizens in the name of "security" while doing exactly nothing to address the problem.

    2. Re:Muslims and Serbia by unixisc · · Score: 0

      Problem is that it's not bureaucrats in Brussels or Strasbourg who are getting raped or killed, but citizens in Hamburg, Frankfurt, Dusseldorf and other places. I'd have no problems if Syrian refugees round up the Eurocrats in those 2 cities and possess them w/ their right hand, to use Quranic terminology.

  19. Re: subservient justice? by johanw · · Score: 1

    The Russians are doing pretty good as well. Snowden is still safe from being extradited. Now everyone is hating the Russians though.

  20. COBOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only he had COBOL skills. He could rely on still getting calls from recruiters when he gets out of the Supermax.

  21. Re: subservient justice? by unixisc · · Score: 1

    So is Ecuador, where Assange is hiding

  22. wtf is KL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i like your comment but was KL?

    (i fucking hate unnecessary abbreviations like i hate the unnecessary use of big words)

    1. Re:wtf is KL? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Think he meant Kuala Lumpur - the other city mentioned in the summary. I don't like obscure abbreviations either, but this is one I've heard Malaysians use.

    2. Re:wtf is KL? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Kuala Lumpur. I thought the context should have made it clear. Sorry if it wasn't so obvious.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  23. Government employees are presumably legit targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given how USA is a warring faction, I would think that government employees would be considered legit targets. Probably unethical if they try to simply round them up to kill them, but somehow I don't think USA care about the kind of morals one might usually associate positively with "ethics". I suppose the unethical nature of war is what have there being such crimes as "war crimes". Though, USA committed mass murder in 1945 with the terror bombing of Hiroshima and presumably most people today doesn't seem to mind that fact.

    All in all, me being unsympathetic to warring factions and their governments, I can't help but think that soldiers and their support base basically deserve to die horribly.

    Though, with a list of names of US government employees, I suppose you could make use of that info for other things than physical attacks. Like interrogation for example, or even enhanced interrogation to use a popular term.

  24. Re: subservient justice? by johanw · · Score: 1

    Only because he is in their embassy in London and it would be bad form to bomb the London embassy. If he would live in Equador himself he would probably already have had an "accident".

  25. The mess that's ISIS by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Actually, both are right. While ISIS is al Qaeda in Iraq, it's evolved to more than that, thanks to the West getting its hands dirty in the so called Arab Spring, and happily endorsing the toppling of Ben Ali, Mubaraq, Gadaffi and then Assad. While the first 3 went easily and the West made an assumption about these peacefully transitioning into pluralistic societies - none of which happened - in Syria's case, what resulted was a civil war, since there was no way the Alawites were gonna let the Sunnis come to power, similar to Shi'ites in Iraq. That would have resulted in a revenge bloodbath.

    Also, while HRC, who I fully oppose, did do her part in destabilizing the whole region, it's worth remembering that at the time, even the Republicans supported toppling Gadaffi, and only changed their views on what was going on after Benghazi. Trump however was on record as saying that removing strongmen like Mubaraq and Gadaffi just destabilized the region. In case of Egypt, they recovered by undoing the Morsi coup (or else, Egypt would have been an ISIS republic today) and El Sisi just minding their own business in putting Egypt back together, and not bothering about leadership of the Arab League, leaving it to KSA and Qatar. Libya, on the other hand, became another Somalia.

    Incidentally, the Republicans (not including Trump here) are in a time warp of their own in the 80s. For them, it's still about a contest w/ Russia for influence, as well as not forgetting the days of enmity during the golden age of Reagan. Yeah, in the 80s, Gadaffi was a terrorist, and he did deserve to be bombed in 1986. But after the ouster of Saddam Hussein, apart from the mess that was Iraq, one good effect of that war was Gadaffi deciding to reform and repair relations w/ the West. He voluntarily exposed and ended his WMD program, decided to settle the financial claims of everybody who hated him due to Lockerbie, and restored diplomatic relations w/ Western countries, particularly the US and UK. Once that happened, we had no business trying to topple him.

    Instead, by participating in the bombing of Libya in response to schizophrenic appeals by the Arab League (who on one hand wanted the US to destroy Gadaffi's fighting abilities but on the other, not to hurt Libyan citizens), the West created a situation where Gadaffi was savagely murdered and replaced initially by an Islamic regime, and later by something nobody can figure out. In the meantime, ISIS took over Cyrenaica, and Benghazi happened. What that's done is telegraph any dictator anywhere in the world who's hostile to the US - 'Don't bother kissing & making up - the West will have no qualms about stabbing you in the back'. Good job, Obama, Hilary, McCain, Boehner, Hannity (who supported this at the time, even if he opposed it afterwards) et al.

  26. And the concept of extradition is well established by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Happens all the time. If a person commits a crime against country A and they are in country B, country A may well ask country B to hand them over. If it happens or the details of it vary based off of the specific countries and their treaties, called extradition treaties. For example the US and North Korea? Ya not happening. There are no extradition treaties between those two, and the governments hate each other. so nobody is getting handed over. However EU nations? Extremely strong extradition treaties. If you commit a crime against Germany from France, Germany will have France arrest you and ship you over to stand trial.

    The majority of nations have extradition treaties of some level with each other since they don't want criminals able to run off and hide from justice. It has been a thing for a long time.

  27. Re:General Wesley Clark: ISIS created by U.S. Alli by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    Quit trying to cover up the fact that Al Qaeda in Iraq rebounded from the surge because Obama cut-and-ran from Iraq

    The US was required to leave Iraq via the agreement negotiated by President Bush. If the US had stayed, it would have broken the agreement and been a wholesale conquering of Iraq and reduction of it to US territory status, something that both Democratic and Republican administrations had vehemently denied was the goal.

    And tell me, big shot. Just how long should the US have stayed in Iraq? Another 5 years? Another 10 years? Another 20 years? However long it took to attain an unattainable goal, the defeat of terrorism? Were you going to enlist into the military to go there? Yourself? Why not, if securing Iraq was really that important to you?