Message-ID: <CAO7TKV9bTKZ3h3wOpVLv4mC3JaHNGbut3MDsYPgFz5+Zk3RC_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 13:08:35 +0300
From: John Doe <jd731841953@...il.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Laurelai <laurelai@...echan.org> wrote:
> And that brings us back to what are we going to do about the US Gov laying
> down in the same mud as the bad guys
Good and bad are just points of view, mostly of whether YOU benefit or not.

Ian Hayes <cthulhucalling@...il.com> wrote:
> There are those out there in power who only know the language of
> brute, naked force....
> The murder of civilans is certainly a terrible crime, but that and the
> release of some malware that breaks centrifuges is certainly better
> than other options.

Pre-emption of potential, predicted or "foreseen" violence with violence
does not justify the violence or make it right.

The right option would be to respect their rights and leave them alone,
but strategy game-theory playing americans won't allow that, as Iran is
the weak kid on the block and the fatsos want him to give up his candy.
Not that the fatso really needs the candy, it's more of a habit of bullying.

USA hasn't delared war on Iran. Congress has not authorized acts of
war against Iran, has it? -- If Obama has, he is acting as a rogue agent
of USA, a terrorist - if you will, hell bent on killing civilians with his
assassination lists, cyber weapons and drones. As such, he should be
held liable for any damages, just like americans would hold any terrorist
liable for attacking them with similar means and weapons.

How would Obama feel if Iran sent a drone to bomb and kill his kids and
family at a kindergarten, just because they thought he might be there?

Would it not be just as justified a killing as his strikes have been?
It might even pre-empt some of his drone bombings or cyber attacks in
the future!

Laurelai wrote:
> I don't see how Iran developing nuclear power is a threat, I'm sorry to
> me this just seems like more fear mongering.
musntlive@...il.com wrote:
> And is this how you fail. There is no problem is in developing nuclear
> POWER there is problem when you is weaponize it.
Problem is not weapons either. It is game theoretic positioning.

Bullies who let the weak and robbed get guns end up regretting it when
the weak can defend themselves and can no longer be robbed and bullied.
This is what bullies don't like. This is why americans and USA whine about
Iran, because they bully Iran for it's oil and gas resources, - the candy.

I think the major problem here is that USA, and indeed some americans,
are unwilling to give others the same benefits and equal rights, which
they enjoy themselves on the "free" markets of the world. To which they
have agreed.

Iran is a signator of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty and as such has
every
right to use and to develop nuclear power to peaceful purposes. Indeed, USA
was
the one supplying them with 18 fast breeder nuclear reactors not so very
long ago.

Iran should sue USA and Obama for terrorism on any international, civil and
class action courts for damages to any cyber menaces they've been unleashed
upon by Obama. There is no justification for their illegal attacks against
Iran.
If Obama has authorized these acts of war, then he should be held liable
for
any civilian or corporate damages as well as charged with terrorism. I would
imagine that in these cases the damages run easily in the billions.

This is the right solution for cyber terrorism. Take them to court!

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