This message was self-deleted by its author

[Are_grits_groceries]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Are_grits_groceries) on Sun Mar 11, 2012, 02:44 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[malaise]

1. But American corporations

can get away with murder in foreign countries - ask the Supremes!

[Justice wanted]

2. This is the problem with the illusion that the U.S. is the superpower that can do no wrong.

You are right it doesn't make me feel safer either it makes me frighten.

[RKP5637]

10. The US will eventually have significant competition as a superpower. I wonder how the US will

feel when the tables are turned. There are a lot of people sitting in the US that could be tried in other countries for crimes.

[Justice wanted]

12. exactly. Some countries want to hold Bush Administration personal responible for War Crimes

[TeamsterDem]

3. If the server was here then they broke the law here

A server shouldn't have to advertise where it is so you can pick and choose your legal penalties market in which to hack. If Ireland has an extradition treaty with the US, and granted the US can show just cause for the extradition, then it seems perfectly fair and just.

[Are_grits_groceries]

9. Would you agree with it if you

or someone close to you was summarily airlifted out of the US without any warning? I believe there is an extradition process that has to be followed, but the US now just hops around the globe doling out judgements on whoever they deem lawbreakers.

[RKP5637]

13. And will eventually just send small drones after people in other countries striking them down as

they walk down the street. Technology advances, but mankind, not much.

[TeamsterDem]

14. If I was hacking it wouldn't be my call to "agree" with going to face trial for MY ACTIONS

When you break the law you accept the responsibilities for it. And if you don't those responsibilities are forced upon you by dint of law. That's a pretty fundamental underpinning of civilized society that these 2 would do well to learn BEFORE breaking the law.

The US isn't "hopping" anywhere. They've indicted the girls (pursuant to the law) under our system of laws. What are you talking about? You're acting like we disappeared them when in reality all we're doing is following our own laws.

[MADem]

38. Except for the fact that they are lads, not girls, I agree with your commentary.

And at least one of the lads has been in trouble for hacking before:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/donncha-o-cearbhaill-hacker-fbi-ireland_n_1326998.html

DUBLIN (AP) — An Irish computer hacker accused of breaking into the email account of Ireland's top cybersecurity cop, then using its contents to eavesdrop on American and British anti-hacking detectives, was released without charges Wednesday.

Irish police said they were preparing a new evidence file for state prosecutors to use against Donncha O Cearbhaill. He's been arrested and released once before over alleged hacking attacks in Ireland last year.

FBI affidavits identified the 19-year-old Trinity College chemistry student as the Internet infiltrator responsible for recording and posting online a Jan. 17 trans-Atlantic conference call between American and British anti-hacking detectives.

The U.S. District Court in Manhattan, acting on FBI affidavits, issued indictments Tuesday against O Cearbhaill, two Britons, another Irishman and a Chicago man over their alleged role in a string of cyber attacks on several U.S. agencies and companies committed by an Anonymous hacker subgroup called Lulz Security, or LulzSec. The FBI built its case using the hackers' alleged leader, Sabu, as a turncoat informant who drew out incriminating online admissions from the others.

[TeamsterDem]

40. Good catch. Not sure why I thought it was 2 girls. Thanks for the correction. nt

[MADem]

45. It's those Gaelic names--they read like phlegm, some of them, sound much nicer spoken.

The Welsh have the same thing going on!

[RC]

43. How do our own laws apply to nationals in their own countries.

Pot is illegal here, but not in some other country. Do we have a right to arrest and extradite the pot smokers/dealers in that country, to back here for trial? How is that legal? There is no difference here. I read a story a while back where they moved servers just so they could charge someone with Internet crimes.
As another poster mentioned, Karma could grow some big teeth on this one. We have plenty of our own international war criminals walking around loose.

[treestar]

4. The courts will be challenged with these kinds of questions

Due to the new technology. Not a good subject for outrage.

[jeff47]

5. So...if I hack your computer from a country where hacking is legal

I shouldn't be punished?

BRB, gonna set up some computers in Sealand and steal giant piles of credit card numbers.

[TeamsterDem]

7. LOL

[bahrbearian]

6. And Now Summary Executions are the rage.

[MADem]

8. Those are two of the FBI, et. al., LULZSEC hackers?

Look, the US will ask for extradition, and Ireland will either grant it or refuse it. Ireland does have a say here. They can say NO if they'd like. I don't think they will, but that's because their government has the same POV with regard to the matter. It's not like hacking is legal in Ireland, and that's where this article goes pear-shaped.

It's like firing a gun in Maine and shooting someone standing over the border in Canada. What, we ignore it? Pretend it doesn't matter? The Canadians don't have the right to demand that the shooter appear in their courts for the murder of one of their citizens? They are not permitted to seek justice because the shooter was just over the line and not physically present in their nation?

I don't see the drama here. If the hackers did nothing wrong, let them make their case. Thing is, they did do something wrong, and they know it. If they're any good, maybe they'll be able to cut a deal, like that Sabu guy (who probably helped to finger these guys) did.

[Are_grits_groceries]

15. My problem with this is we

don't seem to be following the usual channels when extraditing certain people.

There are now rules or whatever for those who our government feels have done certain things. Who knows what they are because so much is done in secret.

As far as our courts ruling on this, that doesn't help anybody who gets caught in this system.

[MADem]

20. The Delta Force isn't going to swoop in via Galway Bay and spirit these lads away.

Our State Department are going to very politely ask the government of Ireland for extradition, and that government will either grant or refuse the request.

We all KNOW that is what is going to happen here, so any hyperbole about "Evil America" in this situation is just a bridge too far.

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. How so?

They've been indicted by a federal grand jury based on specific evidence provided by law enforcement and federal prosecutors. The federal prosecutors have subsequently asked for extradition. The extradition proceedings will go on as usual through the Irish courts, as the article clearly states.

So, what is the unusual process in this case? You say that the "usual channels" are not being "followed" here. What do you mean by that. It seems like the usual channels for charging and indicting and seeking extradition that would apply to any crime whatsoever. So what are you talking about?

[JohnnyRingo]

31. Nothing about extrordinary rendition in this article.

It's all being handled above board through diplomatic channels. It's not like we're sending the CIA over there and stuffing them on a C130 to Gitmo.

[Vincardog]

26. If the hackers did nothing wrong, let them make their case???? Presumption of innocence burden of

proof. This post shows the slope we have begun to slid into the pit of authoritarianism.

Not only is are the accused presumed guilty " HACKERS" is a perjurious term)
But they are required to demonstrate their innocence (let them make their case).

The crux of the matter is "If they're any good, maybe they'll be able to cut a deal"
the state does to have to prove anything the accused should cooperate and implicate others.

The Salem Witch trials reborn.
This is why Democracy is dying. It is being murdered before our eyes
and we are demanded to assist in the murder.

[TeamsterDem]

30. What are you talking about?

Everyone charged with a crime must show up to court to defend themselves - IN THE JURISDICTION in which they're charged. The burden of proof isn't lost; the prosecutor will still have to prove them guilty. Where are you assuming that they won't get a trial? The whole issue is that they're possibly headed TO TRIAL, trial being composed of a prosecution and a defense.

[Vincardog]

36. I was talking about the authoritarian attitude displayed by the post. Did you read mine?

[TeamsterDem]

39. Yeah, what authoritarian attitude are you referring to?

The article is about indicted Irish hackers and their proposed treaty-bound extradition here. I fail to see the authoritarianism. What I see is solid legal behavior.

[MADem]

33. Oh, please--the government has them dead to rights. They know where the hacks are coming from.

They aren't indicting them on a whim.

But since you're being very overbearingly literal and accusatory, today, let me speak in excruciating longhand, that anyone who wasn't looking for a pissing contest would have figured out from the context of the commentary:

After the government decisively proves that they were sitting behind their computers engaging in the hacking, because they had an inside track on their activities, to include a witness with the internet name SABU who turned states' evidence and will testify against them, let them make their case IN REBUTTAL TO THE STATE and contest the findings of the prosecution.

Or not. They can sit there and likely be found guilty, or, if they're very clever, they'll cut some sort of deal.

What exhausting hyperbole you engage in, for no real purpose, to defend a couple of little punks who would steal your credit card details as soon as look at you, and not give a flying fuck if you're "liberal" or otherwise. Salem witch trials? Democracy dying because teen assholes steal credit card numbers and sell them so they can buy electronic toys?

Please--these are just little fucker-criminals who thought hacking would be fun.

Let them find out how much fun it is.

[tsuki]

11. Going to Italy to find hackers. Why not go to NYC and

arrest the hacker, Jon Corzine. He hacked his customers' accounts and sent the money to JP Morgan in England.

Oh, I'm sorry. Attorney General Place Holder thinks the money vaporized and cannot make a case.

[Vincardog]

16. Turn about is fair play. If murder was illegal in Canada or Mexico or any civilized country,

shouldn't they be able to fly Bush, Chenney, Rumsfeld and Obama to their jurisdiction and put them on trial?

Goose meet Gandor

[TeamsterDem]

18. Why? Did those guys commit murder in those jurisdictions?

Your analogy doesn't work. These 2 committed a crime HERE because the server was HERE. We didn't lay radical claim to ownership of the world wide web. Just the legal jurisdiction for US servers. What you're suggesting would be to shop loathsome individuals around the world until we found a jurisdiction in which they could be prosecuted - for something they didn't even do there, no less.

[Throd]

17. So what do you think the consequences of their actions should be?

[Hugabear]

19. Imagine if Iran demanded extradition for American citizens criticizing the Ayatollah here in the US

Of course, these rules always seem to work one-way. That is, we can do it to other countries, but they can't do it to us.

[MADem]

24. What does "criticizing" have to do with this case?

The Irish can refuse to extradite, you know. We'll see what they do. My guess is they don't like this sort of crime, either.

[TeamsterDem]

25. Ireland has an extradition treaty with us

That's why we can "do it to" them. And they could "do it to us" if the situation were reversed. But it's not. The 2 will have their extradition hearings in Ireland at which time they'll be able to plead their case. No one's doing anything untoward to anyone else except seeking to hold them liable for a criminal act.

[JohnnyRingo]

29. Iran can apply for extradition, but it doesn't have to be accepted.

Obviously, the Irish government will have to comply with our policy, and that appears to be happening.

I imagine it's a mutual agreement, so if a member of the IRA in New York wants to affect politics in Ireland via the internet, they better consider the possible consequences of their online actions.

I'm not so sure I'm ready to revolt against the government for this loss of international "freedom".

On edit:
I wish they'd bring some of the foreign hackers who infect my computer with malicious malware here to face trial.

[NYC Liberal]

21. They hacked a server that was in the United States. How is the indictment unreasonable?

[JohnnyRingo]

22. I don't necessarily agree with this policy because I need more info, but....

Everyone can agree that because of the internet, there are no vast oceans separating continents anymore. Even a hacker sitting in a tent in BFE can affect government and industry globally with a satellite connection. It's an incredible world we now find ourselves in, and the internet has changed it forever.

Just like the 'net has enabled global exposure of an African war criminal, it also permits one person to affect politics and trade half a world away.

In the future cyberspace world, we have to expect some bad with the good in the battle between technology and security. Note I didn't say "accept", but "expect".

In this particular case, I'm not so sure someone in Britain should have foreign immunity for their online actions, but your opinion may vary.

[saras]

23. It's necessary to call them criminals in order to justify the future drone attacks...

[TeamsterDem]

27. What?

They've been indicted in court and extradition will likely be requested. That's as formal as the legal process gets. Literally. Where are these "drone attacks" coming from?

[MADem]

34. Look out below in Dingle! Mind yer ass in Donegal! Heads up in Dublin!

You do realize we are talking about our ally, Ireland? Are you being hyperbolic for fun and personal amusement, is that it?

The only droning to happen in Ireland is the droning of that incessant bore hogging the snug in the local pub.

[Nye Bevan]

32. The legal extradition procedure appears to have been followed here.

Not sure why people are bringing up drone attacks and summary executions in this thread.

[cthulu2016]

35. How do you feel about mailing anthrax from Ireland?

You wouldn't have to leave Ireland to do it. What if it kills a bunch of people in the US? Would we charge some Irish person with murder? Yes. Would we ask Ireland to turn them over for trial? Yes. Would Ireland do so? It depends.

[Cleita]

37. In a saner world, we would leave it to the Irish authorities to

deal with it. I believe we once had agreements with Interpol and other agencies to do just that.

[MADem]

42. They ARE dealing with it--and they have no problem with our help on this score, either.

Our governments, as always, are getting along just fine--like two peas in a pod. I imagine these kids will get MORE due process on this side of the pond, after the stunts they pulled with the Garda.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/donncha-o-cearbhaill-hacker-fbi-ireland_n_1326998.html

DUBLIN (AP)....Irish police said they were preparing a new evidence file for state prosecutors to use against Donncha O Cearbhaill. He's been arrested and released once before over alleged hacking attacks in Ireland last year.

.....Irish police arrested both O Cearbhaill and Martyn in September after their online noms de guerre claimed responsibility for a hacking attack on the Web site of Fine Gael, the major political party in Ireland's government. They were both released and files of evidence prepared for their potential prosecution, but they have yet to be charged over the Fine Gael attack.

According to the affidavit by FBI Special Agent George Schultzel, O Cearbhaill decided to crack the email codes of his recent police captors....O Cearbhaill was able to crack into the private email accounts of two detectives in the Irish police's Computer Crime Investigation Unit, including its commander — and found a security gold mine because both detectives had been forwarding security-sensitive emails from their police accounts.

...The affidavit reports that O Cearbhaill told his LulzSec contact Sabu Jan. 9 he had "just got into the iCloud for the head of a national cybercrime unit. I have all his contacts and can track his location 24/7." In a footnote, Schultzel identifies O Cearbhaill's target as the Irish police's cybercrime supervisor.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. Or, operating drones from the U.S. to Afghanistan to kill a bunch of people.

Maybe we should extradite the drone operators to Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Yemen for trial.

[MADem]

47. In the case of Afghanistan, we're on the side of the AFGHAN government.

We're over there fighting their war and training their military. There's convergence.

We're also on the side of the Yemeni government, and they give us license to drone overhead.

The Pakistanis may gripe for public consumption, but if you dig a bit, you can bet that someone within the Pakistani government gave a thumbs up to that activity--it may not have been the military, in fact, it probably wasn't, but the political leadership and the military are OFTEN not on the same page over there. There's enormous tension.

So, your scenario is a bit problematic.

[alphafemale]

41. They committed a crime in the US.

Even though they weren't physically IN the US.

What part of the persecution is a problem?

Location should give absolution of a crime?

[grantcart]

46. I don't understand what your outrage is about.

Of course you can commit a crime in another country without ever leaving your own.

You can commit a crime in another state without ever leaving yours.

You can commit a crime outside of your house without ever leaving your house.

Mail fraud laws were designed specifically to make sure that people who committed crimes from a distance could not use their proximity as an excuse to avoid punishment.

Just because you didn't physically go there doesn't mean that you didn't commit a crime there.