backtop


Print 61 comment(s) - last by Viditor.. on Apr 17 at 9:59 AM

Gary McKinnon is currently fighting extradition to the United States

The attorney for Briton Gary McKinnon, the biggest US military hacker ever, has said that McKinnon is afraid he will be prosecuted under US anti-terror laws -- which the attorney says could send him to Guantanamo Bay.  McKinnon allegedly broke into 97 government computers to try and find evidence the US government knows about UFOs but has been concealing information about extraterrestrial life.  His illegal activities allegedly caused around $700,000 of damage.  He hacked into the government computers in 14 different states, including U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, NASA and Pentagon systems.  

A UK judge previously asked the US government for some sort of reassurance that McKinnon would be charged in federal court and not under any anti-terror laws.  District Judge Nicholas Evans will announce the decision whether or not McKinnon will be extradited on May 10.  If McKinnon is extradited, unless he has an agreement made with the federal government, anti-terror charges could be filed.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: ?
By Sager on 4/15/2006 8:46:09 PM , Rating: 2
Preemptive condemnation?

That's hardly consistant with liberal ideology, but alas, it is quite common liberal behavior.

At any rate, the instances of 'preemptive condemnation' happen far more frequently than the bahavior being condemned. It's as if some people have a need to stereotype and degrade...and having been stripped of other socially acceptable targets, they find its now, and fashionable in certain circles to degrade and villify 'amerikkkans'. This is not reserved only to non-americans.

As for a particular point of view being espoused by ill informed people with alterior motives, this forum has far more anti-american posts thinly veneered in the cause du jour. I'm old enough to remember how many west european 'elites' and american liberals expressed support for the soviet union. The bias against the US played a much bigger role than any fact based and fair analysis of the circumstances.

Now, we have a situation where similarly inclined people are so blinded by their hatred of the USA, that fact, context, and fair debate are again swept aside by overriding bias, and while the left 'preemptively' paints opposing viewpoints as those of unthinking hicks, the fact is that the preponderance of those on the left, when faced with fact based debate, quickly resort to ridicule because they simply don't have enough accurate information to hold their end of the debate up.

Of course, if you state an opinion, and know that you can't sustain it through intelligent conversation, you can always 'preemptively' ridicule...




RE: ?
By Decaydence on 4/15/2006 9:17:52 PM , Rating: 2
I see, we are at fault for supposedly painting people with opposing viewpoints as unthinking hicks yet it is perfectly fine for you to paint those with opposing viewpoints as uninformed american-hating scumbags? If you want to assess which side of the argument is using fact, or debating the issue at all, just take a look back at your posts. You haven't once even weighed in on the debate, you know, the one that involves all of these facts and all of this thinking that you and your side has supposedly been doing.

All you have done is mischaracterized post after post, ignoring nuance, interperating each sentence as extreme by ignoring mitigating terminology and taking things out of context, and turning things into blanket statements that were obviously never intended to be.

Then, to further explain your position on this issue, you proceed to redicule and make blanket statements about the people expressing opposing views, while never once weighing in on the debate itself.

Of course, if you can't sustain an intelligent conversation about your opinion, you can always neglect to express it and instead attack the rest of us that are more than happy to have a dialogue about our opinions.


RE: ?
By Sager on 4/15/2006 10:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
If I understand your argument correctly, blanket statements are NOT an acceptable means of discourse...unless of course, *you* happen to agree with them :)

As for engaging in a debate. State some analysis, state what you believe to be the facts, and I'll be happy to debate you. Thus far, I've there's only seen grandstanding and name calling.

Try to relax, just because a point makes a direct hit on your sensibilites, doesn't mean you should get so upset. If you think you're an 'american hating scumbag', then learn to embrace it...denying your true feelings is self destructive.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki