Does DSL write *anything* to the hdd?
Forum: Other Help Topics
Topic: Does DSL write *anything* to the hdd?
started by: 304
Posted by 304 on May 03 2007,08:17
Hi. I downloaded DSL and it doesn't work. How do I fix this? Thnks.Just kidding! But I am an absolute newb with dsl and linux in general.
I done a rough search, but I don't expect anyone to have asked what I will:
I need a machine that is absolutely clean if the feds break my door down and seize my computer. I need a system that I can access the net with, do my business and then shut it off and have no stored records. So far DSL seems to be perfect.
But does DSL write any temporary stuff to HDD? ie: I'm thinking about any kind of swap file (yeah I'm a winblows kid).
I wont be executing any commands to store settings or downloaded packages to the HDD etc.
From my limited exposure to linux and DSL, I assume the answer is that nothing is written to the HDD as it is never mounted. But it's worth my while to check.
(also, the HDD is formatted with NTFS, though I think from memory I have a Fat32 partition as welll)
For those of you who may have some moral dilemma helping me out with the knowledge that I'm obviously doing something illegal, I'm purchasing steroids which are for my own personal use. I wont be selling crack cocaine to school kids or anything morally unacceptable like that.
Posted by lucky13 on May 03 2007,12:44
| Quote |
| I need a machine that is absolutely clean if the feds break my door down and seize my computer. I need a system that I can access the net with, do my business and then shut it off and have no stored records. So far DSL seems to be perfect. |
You confuse your needs with your wants. You don't need steroids, you want them and you want to get away with criminal behavior because of your own vanity.
Your ISP will maintain records showing your internet usage history (there are at least two records of your activities: your ISP's servers and your IP on the sites you visit). There are already laws in place in Europe requiring maintenance of such records for certain periods of time. The US DoJ is pushing ISPs to voluntarily retain data longer. Congress has also shown a willingness to mandate such things.
< http://news.com.com/Your+ISP+as+Net+watchdog/2100-1028_3-5748649.html >
I won't do anything that will help you engage in illegal activity, and that includes acquiring steroids without prescription. Since you mentioned the moral acceptability aspect, to assist you in that pursuit would dirty my hands with the many risks associated with steroid use. I strongly discourage anyone else from offering you advice here.
Posted by curaga on May 03 2007,14:53
It's his choice.. Who are we to limit that?No it won't write a thing...
Posted by lucky13 on May 03 2007,15:37
| Quote |
| It's his choice.. |
I'll let the developers address whether or not they want DSL to be touted in certain circles as being "criminal-friendly." His choice to commit criminal activities doesn't need the aiding and abetting of the DSL community, and I hold deep contempt for people who would ask others to give advice so they can willfully engage in criminal activities and attempt to avoid prosecution. Needless to say, I likewise don't have respect for people who conpire with or otherwise help others break laws.
It's bad enough he's willing to play chemist with his own body and willing to break the law to do it. He shouldn't drag anyone else into his plans the way he did. Hopefully he's more competent with pharmaceuticals than he is with computers.
| Quote |
| Who are we to limit that? |
Your moral flexibility may allow you to look the other way when people harm themselves and others, or even help them to do it. No good can come from that. And what choice will you condone or enable next, curaga? Child ? Terrorism? Just how flexible is your sense of ethics?
Let people who are bent to harm themselves or others find their own way.
Posted by mikshaw on May 03 2007,15:45
My personal belief is that "illegal" activity is not necessarily "wrong" activity. Each thing should be weighed against your own morals (hoping that you have morals) rather than on what you are told is allowed/disallowed.Of course, one should also consider if doing something illegal, but which you believe is morally acceptible (smoking pot on the White House roof, for example), is actually worth the punishment should you get caught. Just because you see nothing wrong with it doesn't necessarily mean you should tease a dragon.
*Personal* drug use of any kind is something i do not consider wrong, on the condition that the use does not hurt others (indignation and disappoinment do not fall under the category of "hurt", although missing work and family reunions does).
The NTFS issue may be a problem for you. DSL can only read NTFS partitions. You will not be able to edit anything on that partition.
Posted by curaga on May 03 2007,16:11
I agree with Mik.All laws (especially in US) aren't good. Say the ones which let Bush act as a dictator, or FBI to listen to your phone calls/e-mails without a court order?
Did you know it IS the law in some countries to be allowed to use drugs?
Child ? That would hurt others.. So no.
Terrorism? Depends. For a GOOD cause, against sadistic ******, maybe...
Yes I know it will hurt civilians. But can you honestly say the Irak war hasn't? Seen the news, where some US soldiers rape women?
Posted by lucky13 on May 03 2007,16:52
You couldn't stick to the issue of ethics, so you've devolved the thread into political hyperbole (there are no laws that allow the president -- ANY president -- to be a dictator, the Patriot Act doesn't give the FBI carte blanche, etc.). God ****.Yes, I know other countries have more liberal laws with respect to drugs; some of them also have signs asking their citizens not to pee on the streets (amusing, maybe even scary; I still love Paris). That's irrelevant because the OP used the word "feds" and his post admitted it's against the law in his own nation.
That's the issue, not how Euro-elitists feel about the US.
EDIT: It's only fair to point out that I mentioned this thread today in context of an entry about HP's solution for ISP/telecommunications data retention and compliance...
< http://lucky13.blogsavy.com/2007....rrorism >
Posted by mikshaw on May 04 2007,04:51
While I don't understand why the original poster would even bother saying *why* he wants to use DSL in this case (simply asking his question would have gotten a quick answer without this OT debate added), and while I agree that we should not be using the damnsmalllinux.org resources to help people do bad things, I feel I must emphasize that I firmly believe there is a mighty gap between the terms "criminal" and "wrong". There's nothing wrong in my view with destroying your own body if that's what you want to do.Besides, the original poster was not asking how to use DSL to break laws. The question was simply "does DSL leave any tracks"...a question that has been asked and answered here at least once or twice before. The only thing that makes this situation any different is the mention of why he chose DSL.
If a person asked where he could buy matches, how is that different than a person asking where he could buy matches to smoke his crack? Either way you're giving the same info, but the second person just happened to mention what he's going to do with them. Perhaps the first person was planning to burn down a building....
Posted by 304 on May 04 2007,09:21
| Quote |
| You confuse your needs with your wants. You don't need steroids, you want them and you want to get away with criminal behavior because of your own vanity. |
I certainly hope you are the model citizen, you make yourself out to be.
I hope you never consumed alchohol under the legal age. I hope you've never exceeded the speed limit. That would make you very hypocritical if you had.
| Quote |
| I won't do anything that will help you engage in illegal activity, and that includes acquiring steroids without prescription. |
Your blog is well written. The article you link to about possible risks involved is a little one sided, but when has the media been fair? Also, the operative word used is "Can" - Can cause this effect, can cause that effect.
There are many things in this world that "can" cause ill effects. Smoking "can" cause cancer. Alchohol too, a friend of mine has traces of blood in his urine from excessive drinking.
Also, the article is predominantly talking about adolescents. I've never met any experienced steroid user who recommends or condones their use by adolescents. Most are very much opposed to it and go out of their way to discourage adolescents.
I could certainly never change your views about the steroid issue, but I encourage you to learn more about it from the other side. So many people are incapable of free thought these days. They simply believe what the television tells them. I don't believe you are one of these people, I think you're just pretending..
Here's a moral question for you: You frown upon me for my intended actions, would you still feel the same if I took an extended holiday to a country where these compounds are available over the counter and used them?
| Quote |
| And while some dipshit who wants to purchase steroids to inflate his body to compensate for his deflated ego... |
| Quote |
| It's bad enough he's willing to play chemist with his own body. |
| Quote |
| He shouldn't drag anyone else into his plans the way he did. |
| Quote |
| Hopefully he's more competent with pharmaceuticals than he is with computers. |
| Quote |
| While I don't understand why the original poster would even bother saying *why* he wants to use DSL in this case |
..and also to stir the pot a little. Life is fairly boring without conflict.
Thanks to those who provided replies. It is appreciated.
This includes you too Lucky13. It's very strange that despite your opposition to my intended actions, you've handed me plenty of useful information tidbits and links. I wonder if this is subconcious on your part, and if so, why?
Posted by lucky13 on May 04 2007,12:30
| Quote |
| Do you consider someone who just goes to the gym on a regular basis to be a "dipshit with a deflated ego" ? |
The gym isn't the issue, it's what you're doing with steroids and why. I consider any amateur in the field of biochemistry who'd resort to artificially manipulating his hormones with substances banned by nearly every sporting association to be a dipshit with a deflated ego. Don't feel singled out. Your interest in using steroids isn't to benefit your health, it's either for obtaining a certain physical appearance (if you DON'T compete and AREN'T tested) or to cheat (if you DO compete and ARE subject to testing protocols). I don't respect vanity or cheating.
| Quote |
| Here's a moral question for you: You frown upon me for my intended actions, would you still feel the same if I took an extended holiday to a country where these compounds are available over the counter and used them? |
Yes, because you're a cheater -- you willfully cheat against your own natural abilities AND in any sport in which you may compete. That's an area where I don't think mikshaw's analogy was apropos; this isn't analogous to getting stoned, where the effects gradually wear off sans a few brain cells -- this is someone wanting to cheat the laws of his nation (whether anyone agrees with them or not is beside the point), to cheat in sport(s), and/or to cheat nature (to inflate one's body beyond its natural abilities) and at risk of much greater physical harm.
| Quote |
| Your blog is well written. |
I know. Thanks.
| Quote |
| The article you link to about possible risks involved is a little one sided, but when has the media been fair? |
Actually, it's a press release from the University of Michigan Health System. Doctors, researchers, professionals in biochemistry, that kind of thing. Didn't expect that to impress you since it's not preaching from your choir of amateur endocrinologists who always seem to know better than doctors, researchers, professionals in biochemistry, that kind of thing.
Posted by 304 on May 04 2007,13:46
Firstly, I'd like to thank you Lucky13. There is a whole world of haters that I'll be subjected to if I decide to use steroids, no matter how quiet I keep it. It's been a lesson for me.Secondly, I'd like to thank the mods and admin here for allowing this dribble to go on this long. Even if it's only because you haven't spotted it yet. I got my answer regarding DSL and also had an opportunity to learn something valuable, allthough off topic.
If I were competing in sports, I wouldn't even consider steroids.
I doubt you've considered the practicality of having the raw strength to carry an unconcious firefighter in full equipment (wearing full equipment yourself) but if something happened, I'm sure he'd appreciate it and honestly that means more to me than your personal opinion ever could.
If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd suggest we do it on a forum dedicated to this sort of topic.
| Quote (lucky13 @ May 04 2007,08:30) |
| Actually, it's a press release from the University of Michigan Health System. Doctors, researchers, professionals in biochemistry, that kind of thing. Didn't expect that to impress you since it's not preaching from your choir of amateur endocrinologists who always seem to know better than doctors, researchers, professionals in biochemistry, that kind of thing. |
Truthfully, I don't care who wrote it. It's one sided. It's forcing a decision on you, not encouraging you to make your own. In one abstract motion it encompasses everything that is pathetic about our society.
Posted by mikshaw on May 04 2007,14:33
To clarify a little (and because I like to hear myself type)...I agree that there is a difference between using a drug for recreation/pleasure and using one to cheat. I think cheating falls under the category of "wrong" because you are taking an unfair advantage over others. If steriod use were not forbidden in competitive events, I would not feel it was cheating...every competitor would have the same option while still playing by the rules. Before jumping on an apparent conflict with what I said ealier: Rules in games are not, in my opinion, subject to the same moral judgments as rules in "real life" (also known as "laws") because the nature of competition requires strict rules in order determine the performance of the competitiors. I do not believe that life is a competition, which seems to be contrary to popular belief, and thus allows the individual to decide for himself what is fair (hopefully basing his decisions on something a bit more reasonable than "if it feels good, do it").
Using steroids to enhance your ability to do your job is something I am undecided on. If it were not for the apparent negative impact they are said to have, I would say there is no problem as long it's not going to get you fired. However, my lack of knowedge about steroids means that for all I know the ads might be right, and the user may be putting more than himself at risk if his job requires quick wits, mind/body control, and the ability to keep from crumbling into little jagged marble pieces while trying to save peoples lives.
Posted by lucky13 on May 04 2007,14:34
| Quote |
| I doubt you've considered the practicality of having the raw strength to carry an unconcious firefighter in full equipment (wearing full equipment yourself) |
I'm a former volunteer fireman (I lived in very rural area without a full-time fire department). I also have many friends in both law enforcement and firefighting. I'm familiar firsthand with both the risks of that job -- I did it without pay, without benefits, without a schedule and permanently on-call -- and with the policies municipalities have to crackdown on drug abuse, including anabolic steroids, among police and firefighters.
< http://www.efdlocal742.com/article_xiv.htm >
< http://www.ci.phoenix.az.us/FIRE/recruit.html >
< http://home2.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/pr/2007/042007_2007.shtml >
Etc.
I hope you get tested if you do take steroids. Lawbreakers shouldn't get to enforce laws. You name the forum and I'll address the facts with you. The question is how open your mind is about the issue.
Finally, this isn't about "hating," this isn't about forcing an opinion on you. It's against others contributing to, encouraging, enabling, assisting, or even advising you in your illegal and self-destructive behavior. I said they can let you find out on your own -- you shouldn't have dragged DSL into your criminal enterprise, no matter how you try to justify it to yourself. I have no qualms about helping people protect themselves and their data from criminals. I have no use for those who abuse technology, or help others use it, to break laws that hurt themselves or others.
Posted by lucky13 on May 04 2007,14:37
| Quote |
| Using steroids to enhance your ability to do your job is something I am undecided on. If it were not for the apparent negative impact they are said to have, I would say there is no problem as long it's not going to get you fired. |
Most fire departments and police departments in the US test for drugs, including steroids, pre-employment and continue to screen for them during the course of employment. Many cities have zero-tolerance policies even for steroids because it makes no sense to let wanton, reckless lawbreakers enforce laws everyone else has to follow.
Posted by curaga on May 04 2007,15:43
| Quote |
| Sadly, one of the responses was filled with political rants and condoned terrorism in certain instances. |
If it was filled with political rants, then why did I keep it short, just as examples?
You may say they're rants, but you didn't say they were false. Good. You accept the truth.
Your believing "all laws are good and must not be violated" is just blindness, I just tried to show that...
"condoning" is just about the point of view. Many Vietnamese/Irakian/whatever would say US does the terrorism, and their guys are heroes/freedom fighters.
| Quote |
| You couldn't stick to the issue of ethics, so you've devolved the thread into political hyperbole |
What's with the word "feds"? If you hear it from the tv, you may use it....
And lucky13, if he hadn't said the cause, you would've helped him. If you then found out the cause, what would you do? Erase all your posts?
Posted by lucky13 on May 04 2007,16:05
| Quote |
| Geez thanks.. I wouldn't tell something like that in a public location, not even about you... |
Here's what you wrote:
| Quote |
| Terrorism? Depends. For a GOOD cause, against sadistic ******, maybe... Yes I know it will hurt civilians. |
And then you launched into BS about US troops raping women -- as though that's the norm rather than anomalous (how many people have been accused of crimes out of the millions in theater), and as though that ever justifies mass carnage. Sick.
| Quote |
| You may say they're rants, but you didn't say they were false. |
I chose instead not to dignify your tirade, just as I choose not to dignify your BS about being blind and seeing all laws as necessarily being good -- something I never wrote.
Posted by curaga on May 04 2007,16:22
You gave that impression with so many lines about breaking the law...| Quote |
| where some US soldiers rape women? |
some=norm?
truth=bullshit?
I just don't get you..
edit: tirade, wtf? Which would you call that, simple facts, or very long chapters of insulting text?
Did you say terrorism=mass carnage? But forgot that war=mass carnage?
I know what I wrote. The point was you promoted it. And called it "rants"...
Posted by lucky13 on May 04 2007,20:01
| Quote |
| I just don't get you.. |
No kidding. I'll never understand people like you who rationalize law-breaking under any circumstance much less who can rationalize the maiming and killing of innocent people.
Posted by 304 on May 04 2007,23:52
| Quote (mikshaw @ May 04 2007,10:33) |
| Using steroids to enhance your ability to do your job is something I am undecided on. If it were not for the apparent negative impact they are said to have, I would say there is no problem as long it's not going to get you fired. However, my lack of knowedge about steroids means that for all I know the ads might be right, and the user may be putting more than himself at risk if his job requires quick wits, mind/body control, and the ability to keep from crumbling into little jagged marble pieces while trying to save peoples lives. |
| Quote (Lucky13 @ May 04 2007,10:34) |
| this isn't about forcing an opinion on you. It's against others contributing to, encouraging, enabling, assisting, or even advising you in your illegal and self-destructive behavior. |
| Quote (curaga @ May 04 2007, 11:43) |
| What's with the word "feds"? |
I know. Hard to believe isn't it. Hell, some countries outside the US even have running water and electricity!!
| Quote (curaga @ May 04 2007, 11:43) |
| And lucky13, if he hadn't said the cause, you would've helped him. |
It's really a case of irony. I specify my intentions to allow people to make their own decision, and get bored to death by a guy who plainly refuses to do so.
| Quote (lucky13 @ May 04 2007,12:05) |
| just as I choose not to dignify your BS about being blind and seeing all laws as necessarily being good -- something I never wrote. |
If you're now going to do a backflip and say you in fact don't see all laws as necessarily being good, then please enlighten us: Which laws is it acceptable to break according to the wisdom of lucky13?
I've started identical threads on two random forums:
< http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25156 >
< http://www.bodybuildingforyou.com/forums....fo.html >
feel free to join up and preach to the guys on there.
As a side note, I'm sure it'll be a thorn in your side to know that I don't mind contributing financially to the DSL project if I do in fact use it for my purposes..
Posted by humpty on May 05 2007,01:37
Right, stop that! It's silly. Very silly indeed. Started off as a nice little thread, but now it's just got silly.
Now, I would just like to point out once more that this thread is displaying a distinct tendency to become silly. Now, nobody likes a good laugh more than I do. Except perhaps my wife. And some of her friends. Oh yes, and Captain Johnson ... Come to think of it, most people like a good laugh more than I do, but that's beside the point! I'm warning this thread not to get silly again.
Right, now! On the command 'Clear orf'...
Clear off, the lot of you!
Posted by curaga on May 05 2007,10:15
Okay. 304, use rc.firewall + Opera + Tor + Privoxy...
Posted by WDef on May 05 2007,20:22
I agree with whoever was quoting Monty Python is describing this as a very silly thread.DSL is just a live cd. Half the point of livecds is not to write to the hard drive unless you want to.
There are many and varied very legitimate reasons for wanting to use privacy software etc and to protect sensitive data from recovery. Just ask anyone working in new product development (as I do).
And let's not forget that organized crime is also interested in your private data - especially for identity and credit card fraud. And they have considerable resources at their disposal, equal at least to your average three letter agency (though their management tends to be somewhat out of date! - some mafia heads have been busted because of sloppy encryption and password security - and a good thing too)
The original poster was silly enough to crap on about evading law enforcement, totally invalidating all the utterly non-criminal uses for this technology. Usually this type of poster is a troll.
It's just this sort of trolling that led to all sorts of silly, idiotic and unworkable laws being considered to limit the uses of encryption and weaken your rights to lead any kind of private non-Orwellian existence, that's if you have any of those left at all since all the 911 paranoia.
Strong encryption and privacy software is all around you and is essential for modern business to function. It's used when you're at the ATM doing your banking. It's absolutely essential for https so you can enter private details relatively safely. That's why the silly laws weren't passed or have been largely abandoned - business can't get along without encryption.
Anyway, there are livecds specifically designed for forensic work and this sort of thing. dsl's not the best choice.
Posted by 304 on May 06 2007,09:55
| Quote (curaga @ May 05 2007,06:15) |
| Okay. 304, use rc.firewall + Opera + Tor + Privoxy... |
| Quote (WDef @ May 05 2007,16:22) |
| Anyway, there are livecds specifically designed for forensic work and this sort of thing. dsl's not the best choice. |
| Quote (WDef @ May 05 2007,06:15) |
| The original poster was silly enough to crap on about evading law enforcement |
Posted by mikshaw on May 06 2007,13:22
You're not being dishonest if you simply do not explain your motivation. The term "too much information" (TMI) was developed years ago by science type people in expensive laboratories as a treatment for those who feel the need to explain everything in detail.Nobody needs to know; nobody wants to know. There's no people-using involved.
Posted by lucky13 on May 08 2007,07:55
Wdef| Quote |
| And let's not forget that organized crime is also interested in your private data - especially for identity and credit card fraud. And they have considerable resources at their disposal, equal at least to your average three letter agency... |
Beat ya to that punch:
< http://lucky13.blogsavy.com/2007/05/05/why-i-like-tor/ >
(Hopefully my host is once again stable for longer than a week and the links work; if not, go to my page and scroll down to Why I Like Tor.)
mikshaw
| Quote |
| You're not being dishonest if you simply do not explain your motivation. |
Correct, and that would absolve others from being asked to support questionable (ab)use of technology.
304
| Quote |
| ahh.. so it's about forcing your opinon on them then? |
No, it's about not aiding those who are known bad apples. You can find your own assistance and your own information without tainting others.
| Quote |
| As surprising as it may be... |
It isn't surprising, especially given my proximity to and familiarity with an international border, travel, etc. Pretty safe bet you're not from one of those other countries you allude to.
| Quote |
| feel free to join up and preach to the guys on there. |
What guys? I only see ads.
offsite:
| Quote |
| Suffering from some of those side effects wouldn't be acceptable. |
But shriveled testicles would be worth it? Acne? Increased risk of incidence of manic rage, early heart attack, etc.?
Eat well, train right, and you won't need to worry about your vanishing balls or break any laws to "carry firefighters." I think that's like the rape case the OP mentioned earlier -- a feeble pretext for trying to justify bad behavior, as though terrorists never had plans for making IEDs or car bombs to cause mass carnage before the rape. You don't need to bulk up to carry firefighters, you need to do that to satisfy your own vanity.
| Quote |
| If you're now going to do a backflip |
There's no backflip. The OP doesn't know what my views on any issues related to crimes, particularly nonviolent crimes, are. I oppose helping those who openly and explicitly ask for help in breaking laws, as well against assisting those who might suspected with a high degree of likelihood will commit crimes, without respect for the nature or severity of the crime.
You came here and said it's about anabolic steroids. Who knows if that's the truth. Maybe that's your cover for something much less appealing to even the most libertine sensibilities here.
The OP said he would help terrorists in certain cases and mentioned a rape (which is being prosecuted -- and if it's the case I'm thinking of, with death penalty on the table) as an example even if it would cause harm to civilians. I have MUCH less respect for that (and zero for him now) than I have for you. Don't take any comfort in that because you're both contemptible; I just have a lot more of it for anyone who thinks terrorists need reasons like rape to kill and maim others and who would use that particular example in the context of a question about where he would -- or in this case, would NOT -- draw a line and would consider offering assistance.
| Quote |
| I'm sure it'll be a thorn in your side to know that I don't mind contributing financially |
No, it won't be a thorn (I don't particularly believe you about it, either). Train smarter and just send the money you were going to use for illegal drugs to DSL. That wouldn't be a thorn, it would be a sign that you have better judgment and character than I think you do.
Posted by 304 on May 08 2007,09:09
Mikshaw: TMI will be considered for all future posts. Thanks for the advice. (congrats on 4000th post!)Lucky13:
- I don't mind paying for software that is useful to me.
- I'm sure you advising me about training and diet is like me advising me on IT security. So please, don't.
- I'm not even on the same continent as you. (There goes your safe bet..)
- Thanks for your concern re: my testicles. It means a lot to me.
- You're right. I could be involved in something much more sinister. But that doesn't make you any less of a loser. Seriously. Get a life. Or put a rope around your neck. Anything. Just something that will stop you posting on and on with your egocentric bullshit as if you actually think anyone cares about your opinion.
Posted by lucky13 on May 08 2007,11:52
I have a life. Rope? It's bad enough you're willing to place your own health in jeopardy for the sake of vanity (egocentrism is your forte, not mine), you don't need to wish harm to others. That says a lot about your character -- rather, lack thereof. Misanthropy is unbecoming.Have a nice day. Seriously.
Posted by mikshaw on May 08 2007,14:55
Please, for the love of all that is delicious, please don't get personal! Having debates is healthy and often worthwhile, but they *always* go bad when it becomes personal insults.lucky13 is a valuable part of this community, intelligent and helpful. Strongly opinionated, yes, but a lot of us are.
4000? holy poop....i talk too much.
Posted by curaga on May 08 2007,15:01
Now he doesn't even mention my name. I though original poster means the topic starter?Lucky13, do you think that US had done nothing at all, before the first soldier rape came out?
You think terrorists don't need reasons, that they're just mad? Hmm maybe, just maybe attacking into their country counts as a reason?
Now it went back to ethics. People need reasons to do something. Bigger the thing, bigger the reason needed for it.
As of me helping 'em, that really depends. Though I may approve, helping is another thing. If Osama came to my doorstep, would I let him stay? No. Not really.
I don't care at all if you respect me or not. It's just your opinion, which doesn't matter anyway. It'd be pretty much the same if half the people in the world didn't respect me. I just don't care. Feel free to hate me, or have a darts board with my pic on it. Go wild