in some previous post (probably recently - in the parent thread?) that phrase was used but I thought maybe it was some FOSS tool that I was not familiar with.
...sorta timely, since there is all kinds of ruckus going on in the main stream media nowadays (as well as on blogs, etc., too, I guess)
about the "hot topic" of whether "enhanced interrogation methods" should be allowable. Dennis Prager (on the radio today) said [something along the lines of] that, if thousands of people are made to suffer, partly due to NOT using "enhanced interrogation methods" ((when their use would have allowed getting info to prevent some terrorist attack e.g.)), then we should regard the resulting suffering of innocent victims, as an instance (or, many instances!) of torture, -- and we should probably make our decisions with that [possibility] in mind. I think he also implied that, sometimes when there is a terrorist in custody, they do not have any pretense of "NOT" intending to hurt innocent civilians.
very interesting ...
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Jim March
<1.jim.march@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Ryan Rix <phrkonaleash@gmail.com> wrote:
> detection != decryption
Except they can then beat the password out of you, aka "rubber hose decryption".
Jim
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - [...]