Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:00:32 -0700
From: "Zach C." <fxchip@...il.com>
To: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@...merofgod.com>
Cc: "full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk" <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [OT] the nigger said: "American people
 understand that not everybody's been following the rules"

Indeed? Are they supposed to be taking pictures of events with handmade
cameras? Wearing clothes they made from the ground up? Not shaving or
shaving with crudely-fashioned makeshift blades from spare metal?

The usage of corporate products does not disqualify one from criticizing
those corporations, their behaviors, their products or the government. At
least partially because it's practically unavoidable for most people. Are
you honestly saying they should have just spread local word of mouth in
their area and hoped it would sweep the country because that wouldn't have
used any corporate resources? That is a most inefficient way of moving
people, especially with a news media that is proving actively hostile to
those who are admittedly threatening its cushy seat.
On Oct 12, 2011 9:41 AM, "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@...merofgod.com>
wrote:

>  I saw this on FB and thought I would pass it along:****
>
> http://99percentexif.tumblr.com/****
>
> ** **
>
> It’s the exif data from the photos the 99%’ers are posting – showing the
> $1000 systems, cameras, and software they are using to post.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> t****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk [mailto:
> full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk] *On Behalf Of *Christian
> Sciberras
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:45 AM
> *To:* noloader@...il.com
> *Cc:* full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] [OT] the nigger said: "American people
> understand that not everybody's been following the rules"****
>
> ** **
>
> Regarding who's doing the most damage to US economy, I'll just say I won't
> comment.****
>
> ** **
>
> I take issue with the 1%/99% idea; ie, the excuse that some people deserve
> more just because they are allowed to lie - even if it makes them
> hypocrites.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com>
> wrote:****
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@...il.com>
> wrote:
> > Darren's and indeed many other people's lame excuse is that they're too
> > humble to be greedy. As if!****
>
> Its not about greed - pursuit of wealth is fine. You just can't harm
> others while doing it. (Well, apparently you can in the US).
>
> One of the funniest things I ever read regarding Bin Laden's little
> war was a boycott of the US dollar to reduce reliance [on the dollar]
> and to harm the US economy [1].
>
> Thought experiment: terrorist wanted to ruin the US economy. US
> Financial institutions threw the US (and world) economy into a
> recession (again). The US financial institutions responsible must be
> terrorist organizations.
>
> Thank {insert higher being here} that Bin Laden did not make a PAC
> contribution on 9/10.
>
> Jeff
>
> [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/world/middleeast/30binladen.html****
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@...il.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Darren Martyn
> >> <d.martyn.fulldisclosure@...il.com> wrote:
> >> > Chris - Empathy, guilt, and morals. Guilt being a major factor. The
> >> > possibility was always there to make millions via evil means, but
> morals
> >> > and
> >> > knowing it would be hard to live with.
> >> >
> >> > The problem is not getting lots of money. That is the easy part. The
> >> > issue
> >> > is with living with yourself afterward.
> >> How about illegal? Check out the Hobbs Act [1]. I'm not making this
> >> crap up - the US has laws on the books for negatively affecting
> >> commerce (which the crash did), and using fear to peddle their warez
> >> (how financial institutions market their instruments). There's
> >> probably provisions in the PATRIOT Act, too.
> >>
> >> The last tine I checked (about a year ago), the SEC had opened fewer
> >> than 100 civil investigations. No criminal investigations, despite the
> >> fact that some of the financial institutions created spurious ratings
> >> companies just to rate their instruments 'good'.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/131mcrm.htm
> >>****
>
> >> [SNIP]****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists