Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Feds Overstate Software Piracy's Link To Terrorism

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the gotta-make-a-point dept.

Software 448

Lucas123 writes "Attorney General Michael Mukasey claims that terrorists sell pirated software as a way to finance their operations, without presenting a shred of evidence for his case. He's doing it to push through a controversial piece of intellectual property legislation that would increase IP penalties, increase police power, set up a new agency to investigate IP theft, and more. 'Criminal syndicates, and in some cases even terrorist groups, view IP crime as a lucrative business, and see it as a low-risk way to fund other activities,' Mukasey told a crowd at the Tech Museum of Innovation last week."

cancel ×

448 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well duh (5, Interesting)

Slimee (1246598) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945384)

When has the government ever presented a shred of evidence for any of their radical claims and crusades?

Re:Well duh (1, Insightful)

nedburns (1238162) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945436)

The shreds of ships in Pearl Harbor were pretty good evidence that we needed to confront Japan.

Re:Well duh (5, Insightful)

Slimee (1246598) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945496)

Ok let me be more specific, when in this post 9/11 world, has the government presented evidence in its claims and crusades.

Re:Well duh (1, Troll)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945544)

This administration will stop at nothing to make this a police state.

Republicans, you're getting what you wanted. Hope it works out for you.

Re:Well duh (2, Insightful)

webmaster404 (1148909) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945734)

Republicans, you're getting what you wanted. Hope it works out for you.

Its not just republicans, democrats are guilty too. In fact, I would go as far as to say that conservatives (not necessarily republicans) are the lesser of two evils. I don't see the democrats supporting free software any more then republicans. I don't see democrats striking down draconian laws such as the DMCA. Now they have supported some needed things such as the toning-down of the patriot act because 85% of it wasn't needed 6 months after 9/11. The moment some candidate supports true freedom, and not burning the Constitution (That means, true freedom of speech, and also the right to bear arms) So, before you place this blame on the republicans, look at the democrats, they aren't exactly saints either.

Re:Well duh (5, Insightful)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945768)

The Republicans are the ones who tarnish critics of the expansion of executive power as anti-American and traitorous. The Democrats have generally failed to oppose this tendency adequately, but let us be under no illusions about where the real engine for this growth of policing state power is coming from.

Re:Well duh (0)

bconway (63464) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945896)

Which president signed the DMCA into law?

Re:Well duh (5, Interesting)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946126)

The DMCA was bullshit. But it wasn't pushed on the pretext of a war on terror, it was pushed on the pretext of possible economic harm to certain industries. And it didn't result in widespread surveillance, imprisonment without habeas corpus, torture, no-fly lists, fingerprinting at the border (I'm married to a non-US citizen: coming into this country has become a ridiculous hassle). I actually protested - on the streets, with banners and all - Clinton's Kosovo escapades, so don't accuse me of partisanship.

And which of the parties' presidential candidates is beating the drum of war and playing the security-panic card? I think that would, again, be the Republicans.

I call bullshit (4, Insightful)

z80kid (711852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946046)

I call bullshit

Yeah, the current administration is guilty of that crap.

What about the last administration and it's wagging the dog wars in Somalia and Kosovo - where there was NO US interest at all let alone oil interests? When groups [findarticles.com] opposed to the administration suddenly found themselves audited [findarticles.com] by the IRS? Where hundreds of FBI files on political opponents turned up in the White House (can you say Nixon?)

The parent poster was right. The democrats will violate your rights just as quick as the Republicans. They will just feed you a story you can swallow, instead of one the Republicans can swallow.

Re:I call bullshit (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946186)

The democrats will violate your rights just as quick as the Republicans.

This may be true but you have to admit the Republicans are a lot better at it.

Re:Well duh (5, Insightful)

Stalyn (662) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946040)

Bullshit. Every time someone says "the democrats and the republicans are the same" I think back to 2000 when I said something similar.. "Bush or Gore... eh it doesn't really matter, both parties are the same". And boy I don't think I've ever been so wrong about something in all my life.
 

Re:Well duh (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946224)

The grass is always greener on the other side. Pretending that Gore wouldn't have done similar things is naive in the face of things Clinton did. Go ahead and believe in the magic pill of replacing the current administration, it's been working out real good for you so far. lamer.

Re:Well duh (1)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945558)

*nod* Can we get this story tagged with "damnlies", please?

Re:Well duh (3, Insightful)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945556)

The shreds of ships in Pearl Harbor were pretty good evidence that we needed to confront Japan.

Like the burning of the Reichstag, 9/11 (yeah, Saddam did it and so did you, for all we know), and a hundred other false flags and set-ups.

"In politics, nothing happens by accident." - Roosevelt

Re:Well duh (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945838)

Ha, way to bring up an exact opposite situation, where the majority of people wanted the government to stop appeasing the axis powers and support thier allies who were already at war, while US ship pussy footed about the pacific avoiding the war already raging all alound then between the Japanese and British fleets, the government chicken-shitted out of it until they were forced to act by the Japanese attack.

Wait, excuse moi? (2, Insightful)

aztektum (170569) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945874)

How the hell does that answer his question? Pretty big difference between "Holy fuck we're being bombed by the Japanese!" and "Terrorists abroad are selling pirated, copyrighted material. Better clamp down with draconian laws back home!"

Re:Well duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945954)

You say "we" here, is that an indication that you are willing to take responsibility for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings?
What evidence do I need to present if I would like to kill >200k civilians?

Oh, I forgot, patriotism is one way only..

Re:Well duh (0)

waveman (66141) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946144)

> The shreds of ships in Pearl Harbor were pretty good evidence that we needed to confront Japan.

Don't be so naive.

1. The US had been blockading Japan's access to raw materials for some time. From the Japanese point of view they had little choice but to attack, and to start a fight they knew they would almost certainly lose. The US hierarchy knew this.

2. The US had broken the Japanese ciphers and knew from them that Japan was planning an attack on Pearl Harbor. This information was not passed on to Hawaii. The previous commander of the Hawaii base had been replaced by a person who was known to be a dolt.

3. The US needed a pretext to enter the war. A major Japanese attack would be a good pretext and would inflame public opinion as required.

The US has a long track record of such behavior. The Gulf of Tonkin incident is one example.

Re:Well duh (5, Insightful)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945442)

Attorney General Michael Mukasey claims that terrorists sell pirated software as a way to finance their operations
Who needs to sell pirated software when you can get it for free? And what does the government say to the claims that its secretive services launder money and participate in the illegal drug trade to.. er.. spread freedom and er.. prosperity and.. what's the other one? Democracy, that's right. You launder money and poison my kids, and call everybody a criminal and terrorist, and I get to vote for you - that's sweet. Nawww, not a shred of truth in it Mommy!

Re:Well duh (4, Funny)

blhack (921171) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945740)

Who needs to sell pirated software when you can get it for free?
Now, most people YOU know would probably know how to get warez for free. Most people I know know how to get warez for free, but most PEOPLE don't.

DO you think the type of person that requires help moving their computer from one room to another would be able to figure out how to work an FTP client, or what a "tracker" was?

This is why my sister always asks me for a copy of Photoshop for her birthday. She has no idea how to get it for free online.
SHHH!!!! Don't tell her I have been secretly slipping her copies of the GIMP all these years.

Kids, if you like a piece of software...BUY IT!

Re:Well duh (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945870)

This is why my sister always asks me for a copy of Photoshop for her birthday. She has no idea how to get it for free online.
SHHH!!!! Don't tell her I have been secretly slipping her copies of the GIMP all these years.
...

I have a hard time believing she wouldn't know the difference; even a computer retard can tell that you don't spell Photoshop "GIMP". But if that's true, that's pure hilarity. It's pretty funny just for the idea. :)

Re:Well duh (1)

blhack (921171) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945962)

I have a hard time believing she wouldn't know the difference; even a computer retard can tell that you don't spell Photoshop "GIMP". But if that's true, that's pure hilarity. It's pretty funny just for the idea. :)
Well no, shes not stupid. The total lack of the word "photoshop" anywhere in the software is a good indicator.

It usually just takes a bit of explaining and sitting down with her to show her how things work to get her to use the GIMP instead.

I usually just get her a sweater or something.

Re:Well duh (2, Insightful)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945968)

Now, most people YOU know would probably know how to get warez for free. Most people I know know how to get warez for free, but most PEOPLE don't.

Actually, on the contrary, most other people get their unpaid-for stuff from work, or borrowing CD's off friends, or they just go to the shop and buy it. Yes, they don't use torrents or FTP or other online tools. OTOH I don't need to pirate any software because everything I do has an open-source tool available for it, be it programming, word processing, finances, drawing, music playback, sound recording, 5-minute games, or educating the kids.

And if terrorists are making money from selling pirated software, then the 'terrorists' are zit-covered teenagets at swap-meets, or short, smiling, hungry-looking peddlers at down-town asian markets with their crate of CD's selling obviously incorrectly labelled software that they burnt at home.

But this is redundant because we knew all this well before this thread started.

Re:Well duh (3, Insightful)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946202)

Most people don't know how to get warez for free, even more people don't know where to buy warez either. Where the fuck do you buy a pirated copy of photoshop?

Dodgy bloke on the corner? No, he just has shitty DVD's.
That shifty looking geyser at the pub? Nope, All he has are the latest chart singles's and the last few Now! CDs.
My mates cousin nobby? Nah, he can chip my Xbox and sell me pirate games, but no Photoshop here.

I've seen pirated software at computer fairs a long time ago, in the days of dialup, but these days, no chance. The common way for someone who doesn't know where to get it online, is the old CD passed about, you only need 1 nerd to download it, then hte CD can go round dozen of thier mates.

the only pirate stuff I've ever seen actually sold anytime recently are console games sold to chavs with no PC. I've not seen anyone selling a pirate PC game or software since like 1996. Even back in the days of the Amiga, all the pirate stuff we had was copied off mates, either you bought the real one, or you copied a mate's real one, no-one bought a copy, all the dodgy market stalls sold fuzzy-pictured VHS, never computer games or software.
Seriously, do you know any shop, market stall, or random bloke at all who would sell you a pirate copy of photoshop, or any other PC software?

Re:Well duh (5, Funny)

Slashdot Suxxors (1207082) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945446)

Judging from the high quality of his videos, it should be clear to anyone that Osama obviously uses cracked versions of Adobe Final Cut. We don't need the government to tell us that.

I'll second that (1)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945450)

Behold! When I noticed a response to this I secretly told myself "well it's probably a duh response", knowing just how well known the Fed's scare tactics come with "dem damn turrists". haha! I was correct!

Re:Well duh (1)

Jrabbit05 (943335) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945474)

The real point is they've said the terrorists don't want to fund our corporations. Oh snap. IMAGINE THAT FOLKS. Would you buy EXPLODING SAM branded apple pie? :)

Re:Well duh (3, Insightful)

PachmanP (881352) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945490)

No no you have it all wrong. They have all the evidence they need. I think most of us here would agree that piracy does cost corporations some amount of money/profit. Well, you see, Terrorism is defined as "cutting into corporate profit" not this silly notion of killing civilians to make political statements. That's why they're insurgents in Iraq. They're making someone in the military industrial complex wads of cash!

Did I really just say that? I've been here to long.

Re:Well duh (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945590)

When have they ever NEEDED to present evidence when they can scare the public?

Most are sheep, and believe the garbage fed to them by the media.

Evidence enough to scare me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945956)

Well they are certainly presenting evidence enough to scare the willies out of me.

By now, I am now thoroughly scared of the current American administration.
It is obvious that they no longer feel subtlety is necessary to get what they want.

It should scare the willies out of you too.

Re:Evidence enough to scare me (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946114)

The current administration is no worse then the previous, or next.

We have reached the point of critical mass on the way to becoming a police state. It really wont matter who is in office, as the system has its own momentum.

He's not overstating the link (2, Funny)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945412)

Overstate? I think it's a bit harsh and premature to claim that he's *over*stating the link between piracy and terrorism. I mean, Mukasey's a good guy, really does his homework. You think he's overstating what his evidence can justify? Really? Okay then, see if you can "explain away" the time they caught an IRA (Irish Republican Army) guy selling disks loaded with illegal copies of Windows at a flea market in Belfast in '86?

Yeah. I think it's time to "think different" about trivializing the connection between software piracy and 9/11.

Windows? (4, Interesting)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945534)

I thought you were serious until the bit about the IRA in 1986. Windows 3.0 was introduced in 1990. I think Windows 1.0 existed in 1986 but who would go through the trouble to pirate that? It wasn't until Windows 95 that operating systems really had any currency as a commodity (thanks to a ludicrous advertising campaign that changed the computer industry forever); the idea of someone hawking Windows 1.0 alongside illegal VHS tapes is pretty bizarre, to say the least.

Re:He's not overstating the link (0)

UncleTogie (1004853) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945576)

Okay then, see if you can "explain away" the time they caught an IRA (Irish Republican Army) guy selling disks loaded with illegal copies of Windows at a flea market in Belfast in '86?

Citation and/or names, please...

TROLL? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945732)

WOW. You guys REALLY need to recalibrate your sarcasm detectors...

What's the term for that now? Sarcasm-dar? Sar-dar? Sardaukar?

"Genuine" Windows Vista... (4, Funny)

PlatyPaul (690601) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945418)

... Suicide Bomber Edition.

Putting the "death" back in BSOD.

Warning, buzzword overload ! (4, Funny)

DrYak (748999) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945894)

They just forgot to find a way to somewhat also cram the "child pornography" keyword together with "terrorist" and "pirate".

Re:Warning, buzzword overload ! (2, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946208)

Don't worry, I'm sure that next week they'll release a statement that the evil IP pirates are using their ill gotten gains to buy nasty Linux servers which they use to further their evil organizations by renting websites to child pornographers and terrorists!


But seriously, am I the only one who is getting tired of the obvious whoring of our rights to the multinational corporations? At least in the old days they would TRY to keep the suspension of disbelief going. Now they are as bad as 80's pro wrestling. What we need is a CNN style news feed at the bottom when asshats like this guy talk with a running message-"This person was bought from you by-" along with the list of asses he is kissing. Just another excuse to protect record profits while screwing any chance we had of keeping anything close to fair use or not having a police state. But this is my 02c, feel free to drink the koolaid if you can stomach it.

No shame (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945428)

I can't believe how shamelessly politicians are using the terrorist bogeyman, and how easily people fall for it. Well, yes I can. But really, what's next? I'd like to say it can't get any more ludicrous than this, but I bet it can.

Re:No shame (2, Funny)

eihab (823648) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945760)

I'd like to say it can't get any more ludicrous than this, but I bet it can
From his speech [justice.gov] :

That is not to suggest that we've been standing idly by before now. Yesterday, for example, I met with entertainment industry leaders in Los Angeles, where I participated in a roundtable discussion focused on IP issues and enforcement strategies. Earlier this morning, I had a similar roundtable discussion with leaders from Silicon Valley.
Theories about how the "roundtable" discussions went are left as an exercise for your 2 years old...

Re:No shame (2, Interesting)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945918)

"A Russian mobster selling fake handbags through a middleman in New York may also be selling pirated DVDs in London, counterfeit AIDS medicine in Africa, and child pornography over the internet."

Did he just imply that the child porn was copy written? The whole speech was on IP laws. And what do mobsters have to do with anything or the russians. Think it might be possible hes trying to link mafia, russians and CP, things people dont like in the states to piracy? Come on, russians maybe but the mob and CP is totally unrelated.

Re:No shame (1)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946222)

And what do mobsters have to do with anything or the russians.

Well, it could have something to do with that Russian Mafia thing. Just a hunch.

Re:No shame (5, Insightful)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945792)

It really is quite shameful, I've seen software pirates. They are the dudes on the side streets of Shanghai selling "Genuine Windows Vista" DVD's for a dollar (about 7 RMB). They most certainly are not terrorists.
And to answer your question, next the government will claim terrorists are raising funds through an elaborate cheese laundering operation. First stealing US Gov. Cheese, then selling it on the black market at fantastic profit margins. Everyone, please turn in your local Dairy Farmer (he's undoubtedly in on the operation)!

Re:No shame (1)

pwilli (1102893) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945876)

Cheese... suddenly the new race for the moon makes a lot more sense.

Perhaps they actually know. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945440)

If the CIA's doing the piracy, perhaps they know how much funds it generates.

Well then (4, Funny)

Drooling Iguana (61479) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945444)

It's a good thing sites like thepiratebay.org are making the sale of physical copies of pirated media much less profitable. Get those Torrents running for Uncle Sam!

Utter lies (5, Insightful)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945448)

Normally I am very reserved when it comes to political commentary. However, this time I simply cannot help but note that the show has certainly reached a new low, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves.

It is absolutely despicable that we've become so fat and complacent, that we allow our government to pull these sorts of stunts. Looking at the proposed legislation, one should note that IP infringement might be punished more severely than rape, if these laws are to become real. Actually, we should see the whole thing as a rape... the rape of our Constitution, and every value that made our society ever so slightly better than the regimes we like to fight so much.

Re:Utter lies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945522)

this time I simply cannot help but note that the show has certainly reached a new low, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves.

Why should I be ashamed that the Republican president appointed some person with absolutely no regard for the truth to the position of Attorney General, putting him in the top position of the Department of Justice?

After all, since when has "truth" had anything to do with justice in the United States? As far back as I can remember, Justice has always been about the connections you had and the lawyers you could hire.

Re:Utter lies (2, Informative)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945600)

What annoys me about this kind of hippie nonsense is that you single out the United States. You know, last time I checked, it was about the connections you had REGARDLESS of the country.

Re:Utter lies (4, Insightful)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945800)

Thing is, raping a citizen only harms the citizen. Raping a corporation harms a campaign contributor. Which way do you think your Congresscritter is gonna vote?

Why do you think campaign financing reform is drastically needed, but will never happen? When the government puts the needs of corporations before the needs of its citizens, it's already way too late. Hope you have your bug-out package and bribe money to get a coyote to pass you through the border...

Re:Utter lies (1)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946026)

Through the border where? Into Mexico? Are you going to tell me they have less of a corruption problem?

At least here we're free to whine about it, with little fear of having our children's ears sent to us as a reminder of who runs the show.

Which is worse, Terrorism, or the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945456)

Do you want to support someone who whats to bomb you out of existence, or someone who wants to sue you out of existence?

Re:Which is worse, Terrorism, or the RIAA (1)

TheGavster (774657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945508)

It's possible I'd get off on self defense if I shot the bombing one ... so that one.

Forgive me I am young. (1)

Warll (1211492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945480)

terrorists sell pirated software
Sure they may be willing to sell it, but who in their right mind would pay money for it?

I cant wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945484)

If they do this. They have no idea what will happen. Riots. Secrecy. If they keep taking my freedoms because of "terrorism" I will help. One used to associate terrorism with explosives and killing. Now associate it with me.

I like buying software from terrorists... (4, Funny)

realmolo (574068) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945498)

My copy of Windows XP doesn't just *crash*, it crashes into *buildings*.

Duh (2, Insightful)

superdana (1211758) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945550)

They overstate everything's link to terrorism.

Re:Duh (1)

N1ck0 (803359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945676)

They overstate everything's link to terrorism.
Everything can be linked to terrorism!!!??? From this point on I'm doing my patriotic duty as a US Citizen to do absolutely nothing.

oh, how convenient (5, Insightful)

vajaradakini (1209944) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945588)

Everything that's illegal and/or generally not approved of by the US government "supports the terrorists".

Smoke locally grown pot (as most pot in the US is): you're supporting the terrorists!
Download your music through a peer to peer network: you're supporting the terrorists!
Pirate your software: you're supporting the terrorists!

It's the red scare [wikipedia.org] all over again, but with a different enemy, isn't it? "Don't forget to go spend all your money on things you don't need and can't afford. If you don't spend more than you make and support our corporate buddies, you clearly want the terrorists to win."

Re:oh, how convenient (3, Interesting)

N1ck0 (803359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945712)

Everything that's illegal and/or generally not approved of by the US government "supports the terrorists".
Pssst... The US Government supports the terrorists too.

Re:oh, how convenient (2, Informative)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945736)

Afghanistan IS one of the worlds largest Opium producers... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_Afghanistan [wikipedia.org]

Re:oh, how convenient (2, Informative)

evanbd (210358) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945980)

And that's relevant to the parent posts' point how, exactly?

I know more than one person who will smoke weed, but won't smoke opium because it actually does support terrorists, at least somewhat...

The fact that you have a personal objection to other people's drug of choice doesn't necessarily mean those people are supporting terrorists. I suppose a straw man argument is better than an outright fabrication, but you're dangerously close to the claims of the A.G.

Re:oh, how convenient (1)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946168)

Im simply implying that its not too far fetched for a terrorist group leader/dictator to rely on local drug harvesting for supplemental funding. Were I a terrorist leader in a third world country that was a large producer of narcotics I sure as hell would be taking advantage of the situation. Its simply naive to think that it didn't in some way support Bin Ladins organization.

Of course I obviously could not back up such an accusation, but read the bottom of that wiki article, there has been documented testimony from known terrorists regarding connections with the drug "lords".

Re:oh, how convenient (1)

vajaradakini (1209944) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945986)

Yes, I know. And buying cocaine puts money into the hands of Columbian drug lords. Neither of these things are related to pot, regardless of what the anti-drug commercials try to say.

Re:oh, how convenient (1)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946226)

Who said anything about Pot or Cocaine for that matter? I was talking about opium and simply pointing out that Afghanistan IS one of the worlds largest producers of opium. I have no problem with weed, I smoke it on occasion myself as a matter of fact.

Re:oh, how convenient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946034)

speaking of which.

How many millions were paid to the taliban back in the day as part of the war on drugs again?

Re:oh, how convenient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946244)

By the way...

These evil talibans were on the verge of eradicating opium production in Afghanistan when the US attacked... Thanks to the USA, the opium trade is alive and kicking and their enormous profits can now be invested in the stock market...

So you actually support terrorists when you consume heroin.... State terrorism that is...

Re:oh, how convenient (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945858)

Oh shit -- I'm doing all of these things RIGHT NOW! I'd better head to my cave in the mountains before the feds turn up...

Oh no I'm confused!! (4, Interesting)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945594)

But I just got done learning that Open Source is terrorism [theobjectiveobserver.com] . Now we are told that terrorists pirate commercial software? Why would they do that if they have free alternatives? Help! I don't know who to hate!!

A new law will do it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945604)

Because as we all know, harsher penalties has stopped these terrorists in the past. Just look at Iraq and Afghanistan and the shining success it has been to outlaw certain organisations. Stopped them right in their tracks. And then theres the death penalty for 1st degree murder. Since that's in place in some states, you don't see people murdering eachothe.....Oh, wait.......

HAHA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945610)

First off someone in the bush adminastration being in a place of innovation... Does not compute! Just like Weapons of mass destruction and everything else that is said by the Rtards in charge.
PIRACY FUNDS THE TERRORISTS!
Coming from the people that acaully pay factions in IRAQ not to shoot at each other and americans...

Pot, Kettle (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945612)

Last I checked the government uses terrorism (search and seizure laws) to finance their law enforcement operations. Hell, the CIA slings drugs to finance their operations too. I'm so sick and tired of this terrorism crap. All of this legislation is trying to address the symptoms of the problem and nobody wants to get to the root of it.

Other new legislation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945626)

It's been found that terrorists also like to eat breakfast. Clearly, we need new laws outlawing breakfast forever.

Tired of all this 'terrorism' rhetoric. (1)

lobiusmoop (305328) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945642)

I swear, if I see the word 'terrorism' again I'll scream. Perhaps it is because I am outwith the USA and not properly indoctirnated, but 'the home of the brave' seems to be afraid of shadows these days, at least at a government level. Do the USA citizens really go along with all this?
 

Re:Tired of all this 'terrorism' rhetoric. (1)

N1ck0 (803359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945882)

Please note the concept of the 'Land of the Free' and the 'Home Of the Brave' are restricted intellectual property of the United States Government, and by not properly licensing these terms you are helping the terrorists.

Looking for change? The US Government is looking for future leaders willing to plan their country's next revolution. Sign up now for free arms, training, and financing.*

*Financing contingent on the United States labeling of you as a terrorist after 20-30 year training period.

Re:Tired of all this 'terrorism' rhetoric. (4, Insightful)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945906)

Perhaps it is because I am outwith the USA and not properly indoctirnated, but 'the home of the brave' seems to be afraid of shadows these days, at least at a government level. Do the USA citizens really go along with all this?

No, the government really isn't afraid of terrorists, but making sure the citizens are allows them to expand their budgets, clamp down harder on John Q Citizen's movements and basic Constitutionally-recognised freedoms, and allows it to ignore international conventions to the point where the US has already been declared an outlaw nation. Geedubya has already told us the 'War on Terror' will last over a hundred years. That's 100 years of increased taxation, failing economy, and increased repression strictly for the gain of the politicians and their corporate masters. Our money is nearly worthless now, and it's just going to get worse as the government keeps pouring money down the Iraq/Iran/Middle East rathole. Welcome to our wonderful 21st Century, and don't forget to pray.

Haha (1)

QJimbo (779370) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945664)

The way governments use the "threat" of terrorism is becoming quite a joke.

They are a little bit right (4, Interesting)

blhack (921171) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945674)

They're throwing the word "terrorism" around a bit too much here, but at least a BIG part of the movie bootlegging scene is rooted in Russian Organized crime. Telecine machines are really expensive and, believe it or not, bootlegging movies can be very profitable.

No, i'm not talking about grabbing the latest RLS off of Usenet, or racing it across FTPs. I'm talking about large scale DVD pressing facilities that are selling to the guy who is, in turn, selling to people on the street corner. Groups get to release high quality stuff, the Mob gets their source for a DVD. Its very simple.

Or did you all really think that guys were risking serious jail time and throwing down thousands on Telecine machines because it was "fun"?

Now, i don't know much about the warez scene, but I would imagine that its a very similar situation.

Organized crime != terrorism. But a lot of the really large scale operations are certainly not being run by a rogue group of 16 year olds.

Republican Legacy (5, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945702)

I would like to thank the millions of people who voted for Bush twice (in no more than two elections), and for Congressional Republicans for something like seven or more times, for making our country both safer and freer, and operated with more integrity, just like y'all said it would be.

But I can't, because that would be a lie.

Piracy (1)

unforkable (956731) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945704)

If he only knows the price of pirated software in third world countries (generally just a few cents more than the price of blank media) he would think twice before making such alarming claims. I can't wait to see him in UN security council showing a burned Vista CD in his hand, and illustrations of trucks "burning" CDs in the desert. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html [whitehouse.gov] [whitehouse.gov]

Oh, the irony! (1)

doti (966971) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945746)


They talk about preventing information sharing at the "Tech Museum of Innovation".

If it were true... (1)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945756)

...wouldn't the better reply be to *legalize* copyright "piracy", to use basic economics to drive their profit margins to zero?

But it is needed!!! (1)

JavaStreet (1183815) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945776)

Don't forget, 55 saves lives AND stops terrorism.
(I don't really know how, but I'm sure it does somehow.)

Does this mean it's okay to buy drugs again? (1)

Dopamine, Redacted (1244524) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945786)

I'll happily stop trying to use pirated Vista and go with Ubuntu....

I just want to know: Does this mean that they stopped funding terrorism with my pot money?

Re:Does this mean it's okay to buy drugs again? (1)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945900)

Does this mean that they stopped funding terrorism with my pot money?
It was never pot, but Afghanistan has returned as the #1 producer of Heroin (there was a brief period right after we invaded when i guess the poppy's took a vacation or something). So now instead of funding terrorism with that black tar, you can fund the American Reconstruction effort? Oh my, I've confused myself.

Tag: noshit (1)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945812)

Wowie. The government has overstated nearly EVERYthing's 'link' to terrorism (think liquids on planes)

Bush's Feds Gut Intel Oversight Powers (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945814)

Meanwhile, Mukasey's partner in crime Mike McConnell (the head of all US intel powers) is out there lying to shut down any constraints [dailykos.com] on Bush's powers to spy on us.

Feel safer?

A new link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22945850)

So this is the new link to terrorism like the whole Saddam and Al Qaida link?

some piracy come form not having the right CALs... (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945856)

some piracy come form not having the right CALs and other hard to work out terms.

Also not have a attorney on hard to read each eula's can lead to piracy.

let's make sure, OK? (1)

nguy (1207026) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945860)

As experience shows, many terrorists also earn a living as taxi drivers, waiters, cooks, and accountants. I think we should put stiff penalties on people practicing those professions as well, just to be safe.

Is this new? (1)

psychicsword (1036852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945878)

Piracy statisics and claims have been commonly botched [slashdot.org] overstated [slashdot.org] or flat out wrong [slashdot.org] in the past.

If they REALLY want to go after terrorists ... (2, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945932)

If they REALLY want to go after internet sources of funding for terrorists they should start with the spam / phishing /identity theft gangs.

That's, what? Hundreds of billions a year in direct theft and extortion of people's and companies' hard-earned cash, plus more multibillions in anti-malware products, damage to data, equipment, and network infrastructure, costs to overbuild the net to handle the bogus traffic, lost revenue due to DDoSing, etc. Not to mention the ongoing construction and debugging of a technology that can be used for even more nefarious purposes - including espionage and sabotage.

wait!! People *PAY* for pirated software????? (1)

daveb (4522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945958)

sorry - I'm just stunned that someone would do that.

Journalism (0, Troll)

rickmus (872230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22945992)

The, umm, 'journalist' makes assumptions too since the Attorney didn't present any evidence, it must therefore be a lie. I would consider this unethical in the field of journalism. But then again, this is SlashDot, the home of assumptions and using 0.001% to mean 'everyone'.

This isn't the only lie Mukasey's told (5, Informative)

ClamIAm (926466) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946000)

Wow, the Bush Administration has picked some real winners for that ol' Attorney General position. I really hoped they would replace Gonzales with someone who has a little more integrity. Unfortunately for the nation, it seems they're more interested in lapdogs who will parrot the Administration's version of reality, no matter the cost.

Moving on to Mukasey specifically, this little fib isn't the only time he's tried to distort reality. Just a few days ago, he stated [sfgate.com] there had been "a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went."

The interesting thing about this comment is that it's impossible to know whether it's true. This supposed call was not referred to after 9/11, nor during the 9/11 Commission hearings, nor at any other time until last Thursday.

However, even if we give them the benefit of the doubt, his arguments that draw on this statement are lies. This is because he made this comment in support of increased surveillance, and also to support the despicable circumvention of the justice system with regard to telecom companies.

The lie is that "we knew about this call but we weren't able to do anything because only with this new, super-powered law can we do that". The surveillance laws at the time he says this call took place absolutely allowed the government to listen in on it. They didn't even need a warrant, as even under the older FISA law, warrants were not needed for calls that comes into the US from outside it.

He lied again when he voiced support for putting telecom companies above the law. Even though Mukasey was a federal judge, he claimed that the telco lawsuits would let the whole world know how our intelligence organizations operate.

Fellow Slashdotters, I hope you join me in saying: what the fuck?! We can't continue to let these clowns get away with shit like this. I admit I've been as lazy as most "concerned citizens" in the US seem to be lately, but seriously, I cannot allow my democracy to be flushed down the toilet by a bunch of arrogant fucks who think they can get away with whatever they want.

Newsspeak (1)

N1ck0 (803359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946044)

This post is to advise all citizens that the following terms are now synonymous with Terrorism:

Open Source
Free Software
Piracy
Science
Global Warming
Civil Rights
Crime
Theft
Freedom
(Study of) Words ending in -ology

Thinking about or using these terms without referencing their link to terrorism is considered a Thoughtcrime

This post is to advise all citizens that the following terms are now synonymous with being Patriotic:
Lawsuit
Intellectual Property
Patents
Commercial
Censorship

Thinking about or using these terms without referencing their link to the positive effect on our society is concidered a Thoughtcrime.

Thank you have a nice day.

They're breaking the law! Quick - pass more laws! (2, Insightful)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 6 years ago | (#22946102)

I don't get it. How will passing more laws change that criminals will resort to crime to make easy money? Aside from the fact the government didn't present evidence that it's occuring, *even if it is*, how will these new laws make any difference? It's kind of analogous to laws against gun ownership. Even if you pass a law against gun possession/buying/selling, criminals will still obtain the guns, and will still have a black market in guns. I mean, the terrorists are *gasp* making money off the opium trade in Afghanistan, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out they're making money off of gun running / arms sales. I'm not saying they are, but the point is, just because you criminalize something doesn't make it stop happening to any significant extent. Often it just makes the illegal conduct even *more* lucrative.

I've noticed a trend in modern politics that the answer to problems with people breaking the law is to pass more laws. Instead of, you know, trying to enforce the laws we already have. Of course, the new laws never seem to hit their nominal 'target' but instead hit other targets. In this case, isn't *selling* pirated copyrighted materials already a *criminal* offense? I was always understanding that individual, not-for-profit copying was a civil matter, while commercial piracy was a criminal matter. Is that not the case?

More great 'leadership' from our do-nothing government.

The title is rather misleading (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946142)

If they aren't presenting a shred of evidence (and in this case, they definitely need to), then they aren't overstating anything. They're downright creating (well, fabricating) a connection. Saying that they're overstating the problem

1. Acknowledges that the problem exists, which it may well not.
2. Furthers the lie, because now all people will begin to believe that there is a connection, and its just a question of how strong the connection is.

And thats the beauty of it (at least from the DOJs side). Despite there being absolutely no factual evidence for this at all, even skeptic sites will only attack the lack of evidence and not the claim itself. Thus, the lie DOES become fact.

HAR HAR HAR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22946148)

This coming from the people who gutted Evolution for intelligent design...
Clearly they know what they are talking about... /sarcasm
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?