Hacker to be extradited
Discussion
esselte said:
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
Nadyenka said:
If he is not a threat I do not know why they do not just warn him..
Well I suppose a trial may be a visible deterrent to others?
In fact they would probably reward the guy.
should I?
do you recommend it?
(goes off to google it)
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
Nadyenka said:
If he is not a threat I do not know why they do not just warn him..
Well I suppose a trial may be a visible deterrent to others?In fact they would probably reward the guy.
should I?
do you recommend it?
(goes off to google it)
esselte said:
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
Nadyenka said:
If he is not a threat I do not know why they do not just warn him..
Well I suppose a trial may be a visible deterrent to others?In fact they would probably reward the guy.
should I?
do you recommend it?
(goes off to google it)
I read that at the same time that Gary McKinnon was rooting around the CIA main frame there were other hackers there some of which were traced back to China, amongst other places.
Marf said:
jesusbuiltmycar said:
Why is it the the UK Governement has no problem handing over this "hacker" yet will not hand over Abu Hamza or Abu Qatada?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233671.stmHamza was extradited to the US.
the article states that his extradition has been approved.
T89 Callan said:
Police State said:
T89 Callan said:
He was caught comitting a serious offence and offered a very lenient sentence and turned it down....
He's made his bed and now he has to lie in it....... for 70 years.
...and only someone with Aspergers is going to rationlise that as making sense, right? which really underlines the central issue here, which is not that he was offered this and chose to spite his face. The central issue is that the man just doesn't get it; that he has committed a federal crime, to his mind, the law is just 'them' standing in the way of 'his truth'. How do you convince an obsesive compulsive with a very different concepts of right and wrong when compared to 'the norm' that what he does is not in his best interests, when most of the time, he doesn't have a clue what his best interests are. Obama should sort this, yes he can. Shame on our Government; they would sell anyone for the right price.He's made his bed and now he has to lie in it....... for 70 years.
Just becasue someone has problems doesn't mean thy should be free to commit crimes without fear of punishment, the people I have met with disabilities are adament that they should get the same rights as everyone else.... well with the same rights comes the same responsibilities.
........And for f
ks sake I'm sure Barrack Obama has got more pressing issue than this, I am actually pleased that Obama is concentrating on the job he is being paid to do, not pissing about judging every single crime comitted.Edited by T89 Callan on Saturday 1st August 02:38
The people that you have met with disabilities, do they have aspergers? and if they do, have they rationalised to you that because they have the same rights, they have the same responsibilities?. You see, that's the thing with apsergers people, they sometimes understand the concept of 'rights', but don't always understand the concept of responsibility; at least not when they are inside looking out, though often they can see the other point of view when outside looking in. Maybe that's you too, who knows, you could have aspergergers, and not necessarily know it; after all, you are equating moral and legal rights bestowed upon an individual by society and the law, with instinctive responsibilities inherent in the individual, as if they are mutually exclusive; and anyone with any sense would know that this is not always the case. That's the kind of dogma that an aspergers suffer would believe in another example.
The Obama thing, yep, he's a busy guy, no doubt about that, but I figure if he's not so busy that he can have a beer to settle 'a social dispute' that he was instrumental in creating, then he isn't so busy that he can deal with another dispute (of many British citizens) that relate to reciprocal equality of the law and matters of national security that the government that he leads was instrumental in creating.
Edited by Police State on Saturday 1st August 23:11
Jimbeaux said:
Pesty said:
Eric Mc said:
mattviatura said:
Here we go again... Big bad nasty yanks..
maybe the quarterwit should have thought about trying to hack into the BLOODY PENTAGON after 9/11 first.
It's a bit like being a burglar in Hereford, probably a bad idea.
I think very few people will disagree that he acted like an idiot - Asbergers or not.maybe the quarterwit should have thought about trying to hack into the BLOODY PENTAGON after 9/11 first.
It's a bit like being a burglar in Hereford, probably a bad idea.
The main ptroblem is the discrepancy in the way the extradition treaty works. US citizens are far better protected from being extradited to the UK than UK citizens are to the US - that isn the problem.
I have no time for him he knew what he was doing. Having his mum turn up on radio 4 all day does not make me think aww well lets let him off and buy him an ice cream.
Edited by Pesty on Friday 31st July 23:51
Edited by Jimbeaux on Saturday 1st August 03:53
How is this being seen over the pond?, are the U.S. public aware of this situation; and do they want to hang him, or treat him? How are the press portraying him?
odyssey2200 said:
esselte said:
Nadyenka said:
If he is not a threat I do not know why they do not just warn him..
Well I suppose a trial may be a visible deterrent to others?In fact they would probably reward the guy.
Police State said:
T89 Callan said:
Police State said:
T89 Callan said:
He was caught comitting a serious offence and offered a very lenient sentence and turned it down....
He's made his bed and now he has to lie in it....... for 70 years.
...and only someone with Aspergers is going to rationlise that as making sense, right? which really underlines the central issue here, which is not that he was offered this and chose to spite his face. The central issue is that the man just doesn't get it; that he has committed a federal crime, to his mind, the law is just 'them' standing in the way of 'his truth'. How do you convince an obsesive compulsive with a very different concepts of right and wrong when compared to 'the norm' that what he does is not in his best interests, when most of the time, he doesn't have a clue what his best interests are. Obama should sort this, yes he can. Shame on our Government; they would sell anyone for the right price.He's made his bed and now he has to lie in it....... for 70 years.
Just becasue someone has problems doesn't mean thy should be free to commit crimes without fear of punishment, the people I have met with disabilities are adament that they should get the same rights as everyone else.... well with the same rights comes the same responsibilities.
........And for f
ks sake I'm sure Barrack Obama has got more pressing issue than this, I am actually pleased that Obama is concentrating on the job he is being paid to do, not pissing about judging every single crime comitted.Edited by T89 Callan on Saturday 1st August 02:38
The people that you have met with disabilities, do they have aspergers? and if they do, have they rationalised to you that because they have the same rights, they have the same responsibilities?. You see, that's the thing with apsergers people, they sometimes understand the concept of 'rights', but don't always understand the concept of responsibility; at least not when they are inside looking out, though often they can see the other point of view when outside looking in. Maybe that's you too, who knows, you could have aspergergers, and not necessarily know it; after all, you are equating moral and legal rights bestowed upon an individual by society and the law, with instinctive responsibilities inherent in the individual, as if they are mutually exclusive; and anyone with any sense would know that this is not always the case. That's the kind of dogma that an aspergers suffer would believe in another example.
The Obama thing, yep, he's a busy guy, no doubt about that, but I figure if he's not so busy that he can have a beer to settle 'a social dispute' that he was instrumental in creating, then he isn't so busy that he can deal with another dispute (of many British citizens) that relate to reciprocal equality of the law and matters of national security that the government that he leads was instrumental in creating.
Edited by Police State on Saturday 1st August 23:11
Police State said:
Jimbeaux said:
Pesty said:
Eric Mc said:
mattviatura said:
Here we go again... Big bad nasty yanks..
maybe the quarterwit should have thought about trying to hack into the BLOODY PENTAGON after 9/11 first.
It's a bit like being a burglar in Hereford, probably a bad idea.
I think very few people will disagree that he acted like an idiot - Asbergers or not.maybe the quarterwit should have thought about trying to hack into the BLOODY PENTAGON after 9/11 first.
It's a bit like being a burglar in Hereford, probably a bad idea.
The main ptroblem is the discrepancy in the way the extradition treaty works. US citizens are far better protected from being extradited to the UK than UK citizens are to the US - that isn the problem.
I have no time for him he knew what he was doing. Having his mum turn up on radio 4 all day does not make me think aww well lets let him off and buy him an ice cream.
Edited by Pesty on Friday 31st July 23:51
Edited by Jimbeaux on Saturday 1st August 03:53
How is this being seen over the pond?, are the U.S. public aware of this situation; and do they want to hang him, or treat him? How are the press portraying him?
Jimbeaux said:
I honestly have heard nothing of it. I have not been watching much these last few days so I may have just missed it. People here would not pay much attention to this sort of thing. However, being he is British, he will get a fair shake and objectivity from the public point of view. As I have said before, Yank citizens are fond of the Brits as well as appreciative.
They had it mentioned in the New York Times. It isn't much of a story. Some idiot hacker getting extradited isn't all that interesting when we already know of the thousands (true) of attempted hackings from China/Russia/ete ete.... I'm a little surprised at how up in arms people on PH are about this. Why do people keep saying that Extradition isn't two ways? Of course it is... Has been for decades. An American can't break the law in the UK and run home to hide!
Tadite said:
Jimbeaux said:
I honestly have heard nothing of it. I have not been watching much these last few days so I may have just missed it. People here would not pay much attention to this sort of thing. However, being he is British, he will get a fair shake and objectivity from the public point of view. As I have said before, Yank citizens are fond of the Brits as well as appreciative.
They had it mentioned in the New York Times. It isn't much of a story. Some idiot hacker getting extradited isn't all that interesting when we already know of the thousands (true) of attempted hackings from China/Russia/ete ete.... I'm a little surprised at how up in arms people on PH are about this. Why do people keep saying that Extradition isn't two ways? Of course it is... Has been for decades. An American can't break the law in the UK and run home to hide!
My reading is:
He accessed the systems 97 times.
He left messages saying that if they didn't change their foreign policy he would continue to do this.
He was diagnosed with this syndrome after the offence.
He sounds like he knew he was doing wrong.
His mother drives me mad with her tirade and own tunnel vision.
On this basis I would send him to the US. However, the extradiction treaty is rather one sided and I would like to know if they would extradite a US citizen to a European country in the same circumstances, if for example some US groups decided to attack the EU or NATO computers would they send them to Poland or Lithuania?
All that junk about fragile systems isn't relevant: he did it and no amount of hand wringing and excusing will do.
He accessed the systems 97 times.
He left messages saying that if they didn't change their foreign policy he would continue to do this.
He was diagnosed with this syndrome after the offence.
He sounds like he knew he was doing wrong.
His mother drives me mad with her tirade and own tunnel vision.
On this basis I would send him to the US. However, the extradiction treaty is rather one sided and I would like to know if they would extradite a US citizen to a European country in the same circumstances, if for example some US groups decided to attack the EU or NATO computers would they send them to Poland or Lithuania?
All that junk about fragile systems isn't relevant: he did it and no amount of hand wringing and excusing will do.
Tadite said:
[I'm a little surprised at how up in arms people on PH are about this. Why do people keep saying that Extradition isn't two ways? Of course it is... Has been for decades. An American can't break the law in the UK and run home to hide!
The case brings together several elements.First, the US tried to bring him under post-2001 legislation (also used with the NatWest Three), where you can "call out" suspects without presenting any serious evidence. By suggesting Gary McKinnon is a master hacker and terrorist, they sought to avoid such fripperies as evidence and just cause.
The problem we have is that the matching piece of legislation was never passed in the US. Possibly something to do with the fact that half of the Senate (including Teddy Kennedy) could have found themselves eating pie & mash at HM's Pleasure for supporting terrorism via Noraid.
Second, the US has presented a tissue of lies to make a case. McKinnon is no master hacker. He didn't write malicious code. He downloaded it via, ooh a Google Search. He even used his own email address. His viper's nest was... the computer at his mum's house. On a 48k dial-up.
As other have pointed out, he accessed unsecured computers at NASA, the Pentagon, etc. Seriously. Unprotected computers. At the Pentagon.
He did not load code. He searched the folders. The most he did was leave a message on screen suggesting the use add a password. They have then claimed that he accessed 97 machines. They then claimed he caused $700,000. Or about £5.5k per PC. Either the US Government is telling porkies, or Dell are playing "add a nought"
McKinnon has never denied what he did. In fact he admitted it (without a solicitor present). He has shown remorse, and he is ready to accept some punishment.
So for some it has become a cause celebre:
- A British Government that cravenly bent over and took it from the US. The revised extradition treaty was promised to be mutual (assuaging the many critics). When the American government failed to keep their end of the bargain, the British Government failed to take any action to back up their commitment to the public (a common failure over the past twelve years).
- The Americans haven't kept their end of the bargain. Again a common theme. Reverse the nationalities, and no American would be coming to Britain.
- The Americans have used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They have misused legislation, and they've told a string of lies.
So the case highlights a number of deep concerns regarding justice, and this (British) Governments failings regarding justice and responsibilities to its own people. Funnily enough, some of us have a problem with that.
Oh and this isn't a unique case. There are others that raise similar concrens (but they are less provocative because they involve brown people).
HiRich said:
So the case highlights a number of deep concerns regarding justice, and this (British) Governments failings regarding justice and responsibilities to its own people. Funnily enough, some of us have a problem with that..
According to your own Alan Johnson the home secretary in today's The Times:"In making their case against the act, critics like to point out that more people have been extradited to the United States from the UK than vice versa. It is true. Between 2004 and 2008, 59 people were extradited from this country to America and 30 the other way. But what does this signify when the numbers are so small? Would they equally argue that the act is unbalanced in favour of the UK over Spain because, in the same time frame, we have extradited only 27 people over there and they have sent 104 back? The fact is that since the 2003 act came into force, not one extradition request we have made has been refused by America. "
So what are you arguing about? It isn't a one way street. If this had been an American he would have been sent over to the UK.... How is this unfair in anyway? I honestly can't understand where you are coming from with this idea that extradition is one way.
HiRich said:
Tadite said:
[I'm a little surprised at how up in arms people on PH are about this. Why do people keep saying that Extradition isn't two ways? Of course it is... Has been for decades. An American can't break the law in the UK and run home to hide!
The case brings together several elements.First, the US tried to bring him under post-2001 legislation (also used with the NatWest Three), where you can "call out" suspects without presenting any serious evidence. By suggesting Gary McKinnon is a master hacker and terrorist, they sought to avoid such fripperies as evidence and just cause.
The problem we have is that the matching piece of legislation was never passed in the US. Possibly something to do with the fact that half of the Senate (including Teddy Kennedy) could have found themselves eating pie & mash at HM's Pleasure for supporting terrorism via Noraid.
Second, the US has presented a tissue of lies to make a case. McKinnon is no master hacker. He didn't write malicious code. He downloaded it via, ooh a Google Search. He even used his own email address. His viper's nest was... the computer at his mum's house. On a 48k dial-up.
As other have pointed out, he accessed unsecured computers at NASA, the Pentagon, etc. Seriously. Unprotected computers. At the Pentagon.
He did not load code. He searched the folders. The most he did was leave a message on screen suggesting the use add a password. They have then claimed that he accessed 97 machines. They then claimed he caused $700,000. Or about £5.5k per PC. Either the US Government is telling porkies, or Dell are playing "add a nought"
McKinnon has never denied what he did. In fact he admitted it (without a solicitor present). He has shown remorse, and he is ready to accept some punishment.
So for some it has become a cause celebre:
- A British Government that cravenly bent over and took it from the US. The revised extradition treaty was promised to be mutual (assuaging the many critics). When the American government failed to keep their end of the bargain, the British Government failed to take any action to back up their commitment to the public (a common failure over the past twelve years).
- The Americans haven't kept their end of the bargain. Again a common theme. Reverse the nationalities, and no American would be coming to Britain.
- The Americans have used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They have misused legislation, and they've told a string of lies.
So the case highlights a number of deep concerns regarding justice, and this (British) Governments failings regarding justice and responsibilities to its own people. Funnily enough, some of us have a problem with that.
Oh and this isn't a unique case. There are others that raise similar concrens (but they are less provocative because they involve brown people).
HiRich said:
Tadite said:
[I'm a little surprised at how up in arms people on PH are about this. Why do people keep saying that Extradition isn't two ways? Of course it is... Has been for decades. An American can't break the law in the UK and run home to hide!
The case brings together several elements.First, the US tried to bring him under post-2001 legislation (also used with the NatWest Three), where you can "call out" suspects without presenting any serious evidence. By suggesting Gary McKinnon is a master hacker and terrorist, they sought to avoid such fripperies as evidence and just cause.
The problem we have is that the matching piece of legislation was never passed in the US. Possibly something to do with the fact that half of the Senate (including Teddy Kennedy) could have found themselves eating pie & mash at HM's Pleasure for supporting terrorism via Noraid.
Second, the US has presented a tissue of lies to make a case. McKinnon is no master hacker. He didn't write malicious code. He downloaded it via, ooh a Google Search. He even used his own email address. His viper's nest was... the computer at his mum's house. On a 48k dial-up.
As other have pointed out, he accessed unsecured computers at NASA, the Pentagon, etc. Seriously. Unprotected computers. At the Pentagon.
He did not load code. He searched the folders. The most he did was leave a message on screen suggesting the use add a password. They have then claimed that he accessed 97 machines. They then claimed he caused $700,000. Or about £5.5k per PC. Either the US Government is telling porkies, or Dell are playing "add a nought"
McKinnon has never denied what he did. In fact he admitted it (without a solicitor present). He has shown remorse, and he is ready to accept some punishment.
So for some it has become a cause celebre:
- A British Government that cravenly bent over and took it from the US. The revised extradition treaty was promised to be mutual (assuaging the many critics). When the American government failed to keep their end of the bargain, the British Government failed to take any action to back up their commitment to the public (a common failure over the past twelve years).
- The Americans haven't kept their end of the bargain. Again a common theme. Reverse the nationalities, and no American would be coming to Britain.
- The Americans have used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They have misused legislation, and they've told a string of lies.
So the case highlights a number of deep concerns regarding justice, and this (British) Governments failings regarding justice and responsibilities to its own people. Funnily enough, some of us have a problem with that.
Oh and this isn't a unique case. There are others that raise similar concrens (but they are less provocative because they involve brown people).
When I posted earlier of him hacking into our machines where we worked, I failed to tell the hack, and the word hacking conjurs up images of someone using ingenious code to gain access.
All he did was use his username and password to log onto machines (on a NT4 network with roaming profiles), download a keylogger, log out, sit at his machine and then spout out what you had been up to. Very funny at the time because he is a funny guy.
Same with the network, he done nothing more really than browse folders or tried to access servers using the c$ share, or try brute forcing administrator passwords.
This is all stuff that even the most basic sys admin should know how to do, and i don't know of many techies who havent had a crack at trying to gain Administrator (tip: rename administrator account, create dummy administrator account with guest privilages and account disabled, even for your XP computers). Hardly the work of a master hacker.
All he done with the US systems was expose similar poor sys admin standards.
I think the outrage for those that support him is that they are trying to do him under anti-terrorist laws, and he definately is not a terrorist. In fact, he is very socialist in his views and although I ceased working with by the time of 9/11, he would have been disgusted with it as we all were.
Tadite said:
So what are you arguing about? It isn't a one way street. If this had been an American he would have been sent over to the UK.... How is this unfair in anyway? I honestly can't understand where you are coming from with this idea that extradition is one way.
As far as I am aware US lawyers need only demonstrate "reasonable suspicion" in order for an extradition warrant to be granted in Britain, however there is no reciprocal agreement. British prosecutors in America have to provide evidence before they can gain an extradition warrant.That's where the problem arises.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7743874/Com...
Thank god for the Tories
Personally, I wish the hacker was malicious. Shame it was someone that didn't do some real damage.
Thank god for the Tories
Personally, I wish the hacker was malicious. Shame it was someone that didn't do some real damage.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff