The U.S. has had a terrorist attack since 9/11 - Credit thefts

[Pockets]

Someone pointed out that Repugs defend * by saying there has never been a terrorist attack since 9/11. I don't think they can claim that any longer. Whether the repeated credit information thefts were committed by middle Easterners or not, I think they clearly can be classified as a type of terrorist offensive against our national security. Remember they're strategy is hit where we least expect it.

[ixion]

1. sorry, but I disagree... credit theft (and 9/11 for that matter) was

criminal, not terrorist.

Terrorism, in fact, doesn't really mean anything. It's just a convenient tool politicians use to demonize one subgroup or another.

[JuniperLea]

4. agreed

whatever is deemed terrorism, or rather, whatever benefits * will be deemed terrorism.

i'd like to ask an iraqi who they think the worlds greatest terrorist is.

[Pockets]

5. I understand...

I've spent a lot of time arguing with bushbots and have picked up some of their semantics.

Regardless, IMO stealing this info was an 'attack', in that the info could prove valuable to those who want to destroy the U.S. The intent may not be just to sell credit card numbers, but by having a record of personal financial information it might be something more sinister.

[ixion]

6. right, but you need to distinguish between attack and hack

sure, it sucks. I have credit cards that may have been compromised (not sure yet), but does that mean I want the credit card companies to turn over security to the government vis a vis the TSA, which has made flying unbearably invasive and obnoxious.

It's criminal because the companies broke the law and stored the data, which should not have been done. It's criminal because a person or persons accessed a secure system w/o authorization.

But when you start equating things to 'terrorism' you wind up with a bogus War on Terror that does nothing but trample on civil rights and the people those rights are supposed to protect.

It's always We, the People that pay for bad policy. Remember that next time your going through a security checkpoint.

[Pockets]

9. Absolutely

I'm not trying to create any kind karma that would cause this administration to get their way so that they can steal even more money from us. I'm just noting Shrub's incompetency.

Terrorism certainly is a loaded term, and more suited for movies than real life. The 9/11 perpetrators were criminals and the word 'terrorism' was used to broaden the scope to include a large group of people and activities in order to give the government more control.

But, there are positive laws that can be passed in response to the credit thefts. Maybe it would take just one: Let us have access to all information that any company has on us.

My initial point was merely that this happened on Bush's watch and may be indicative of some group preparing for an attack on our economy.

[AX10]

2. The Supreme Court (5-4) just carried out another attack this morning.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1574059&mesg_id=1574059

:argh:

[MsUnderstood]

3. hmmm I think there have been attacks

Wasn't the british embassy in D.C. bombed during Blair's relection?

[Pockets]

7. I don't think so...

I think there would have been some fairly large headlines if that had happened. Maybe I'm wrong.

Anyway the point is that our attackers have accomplished stage one of their attack, 9/11, while subsequent attacks will be more related to financial targets. If one wants to accuse * of letting the U.S. get attacked since 9/11 that's where to look.

[BurtWorm]

8. Unsolved anthrax cases happened after 9/11, too.

:wtf: