full-disclosure - Do Terrorists Really Have More Fun?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20021002025437.A1204@hamsec.aurora.sfo.interquest.net>
From: silvio at big.net.au (silvio@....net.au)
Subject: Do Terrorists Really Have More Fun?

On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 03:45:13AM -0500, sockz loves you wrote:
> > Terrorist
> > = those without the resources to wage conventional warfare against a superior enemy.
> 
> a terrorist is just someone who employs terroris,.  terrorism being a military tactic of sorts, usually employing non-conventional tactics, and stuff.  a terrorist can be someone who works for Kahane Chai, or someone who was trained in terrorism by the CIA.
> 
> its just a tactic.  nothing more.  it isn't the basis for a person's character, and certainly isn't the basis for that terrorist to be demonised, stereotyped, and ridiculed.  in my mind, richard's article was on par with freud's work on homosexuality.  translation: lame.
> 
> and thats all i plan to say on the matter
> 
> <3 sockz

I suggest the word terrorist be removed from conversation, and be replaced
with the more lengthy "using non conventional warfare" or whatever
appropriate.  It makes conversations about seemingly tangible terminology,
much more tangible when spoken with tangible quantities.

I am still yet to understand what a terrorist in modern usage really is.  If I
did think I understood what it meant, then I would have arrested my neighbours
since they were commie sympathizers, and everyone knows how them commies and
terrorists stick together.

At least with anti-communist propaganda, the entire basis of bullshit was
around some political ideology which spiralled into name calling.  Not to say
that communism is great.. but has any modern society seen a communist
ideology as stated for communism, actually implemented?  the soviet union,
was a socialist state iirc, and not communist in the marxist sense.  Do they
still teach that at school?  Marx was a full-flight communist believer, and
viewed that communism was the destinity of social ideologies.  Naturally, there
are many other books to say what marx did not accurately predict.  But thats
one of the arguments against sociology as a science isn't it?  Also why
pyschiatry is seen as a science these days (though many would call it a soft
science).  But stick a large enough population in a room, and then start
telling them to zap people with electricty..

better yet. give half 20 bucks, and the other half 1 buck as payment to reply
to these posts.

--
Silvio