Anonymous Declares "Infowar" on Wikileaks Opponents

[The Rascal King]

Sorry for the double post. I think me agreeing to the new Conduct update had a hand in a duplicate reply.

 

[fgdfgdgd]

-snip-

Okay okay okay, i'm going to start at the top of the 'shit you just got wrong pile' List of things you seem to have missed in history class.

Firstly, It was not the Vietnam War, it was the Vietnam Conflict, a state of war was never declared and as such all files relating were not protected from the public nor were Journalists barred from going to Vietnam, and that is why today we have such a large knowledge base about it and not just what we were told by governemnt correspondence.

Secondly, Even by the American legal system you can only be charged for crimes commited in the states, territories or sovereign nation in which they were commited. And to my knowledge, none of these were on American soil.

'Highly important sites' ? Name a few, apparently we know about them now, lets hear it.

Third, Neo-Nazis are not terrorists, they're a political and ideological group sure, but in the terms of 'terrorism' they're little more than thugs holding small riots in sparse locations irregularly. And the IRA? would that be the Irish Republican Army that ceased to be in 1922 that fought for the indeipendance of Ireland? or the Provisional Irish Republican Army that ended in 1997 and were fighting for the sovereignty of Ireland from the United Kingdom? I happen to remember another country that did that not too long ago only a few hundred years infact--hmm, i'll get back to you on that, maybe we can call them terrorists too. *rolls his eyes*

And i'll end with a quote for you: "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."
Guess who said that? It was Benjamin Franklin.

Here here!

Also to add to Viper, Assange is not convicted on anything. He had permission to leave Sweden, and even after his compliance the Swedish authorities they jumped the gun and bypassed protocol and put him on interpol, under highly unusual circumstances. Also for both the Afghan documents and these latest cables he approached the white house and asked for assistance in weeding out anything that would put people's lives in danger, for which he was refused.

Provided he is innocent of rape charges then in my opinion Julia Assange is a great man who will go down in history years from now (he will go down anyway, but i mean in a positive light). Also its just wrong if the US change their laws so they can convict an AUSTRALIAN man when he has not broken any of their existing laws.

Actually, it wasn't rape.

 

[tehbeard]

The saying "If you kick a bear in the balls, you deserve to have your face ripped off" applies to both sides of this.

Cables get leaked, well done America on protecting secure data!
If you were a corporation your ass would be being sued right now.
(America kicked the security bear in the balls)

Also wikileaks, kudos on revealing Acutal body count details, shadyness of goverment etc, but the CRITICAL INFASTRUCTURE LIST? Assange what were you thinking?
(Assange kicked the american bear in the balls with the Crit list)

 

[Random berk]

I used IRA in reference to UK targets. The US is indeed not their target, but animosity among SOME members of the IRA against the UK still remains after all these years. They may not be as active like say, Al-Qaeda, but the British government still monitors them as a threat to THEIR security

Ah right. Against the U.K, the IRA are still active enough. There were two young British soldiers gunned down on their base up in the North, last year I think. And the IRA are always talking about how their disarming for good. They never do, and no one ever believes it any more.

 

[Random berk]

Also i still believe Anonymous is lame even if they help and do something cool because they still have no face and the only time i would take anything a man with no face has to say for truth is if it is "Don't try to lick a belt Sander."

Congratulations on the best quote I've heard on the Escapist so far.

Thank you. As i was typing it i thought what would you trust a faceless man to inform you of? lol.

I suppose it depends on the gravity of what he's trying to tell me. If some guy with his face hidden under a hood told me drinks were half price in the college bar this week, I'd probably believe him, since he'd have no real reason to lie. On the other hand, there is a rather strange individual in Cork who keeps sending emails to all students about an evil conspiracy in my college where the health office are experimenting with mind altering drugs on any student sent in there. That I don't believe.

 

[Shycte]

When someone says that Assange is a criminal, that means the expect the government to lie to them. They accept that the truth is hidden from them.

Thankfully, here is Sweden we have the Freedom of information legislation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_legislation].

 

[Delusibeta]

And by the way, Wikileaks not only revealed important facilities in America, but in UK and in many other countries. So yes, the radical-bombing members of the IRA could possibly use the list. Use your head.

I wonder how much of that list can't be found by Googling "Nuclear power plants/Airports/Factories/Docks/Major cities/whatever in UK/US/Austalia/whatever".

Read this because apparently no one on this fucking site does their homework like a damn adult:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041

You'll see their that these are PARTICULAR locales on the global supply change that could have damaging effects on trade, stocks, lives, currency, public opinion, etc.

Right then. So, Googling "stockpiles of medicenes/major oil pipelines/top ten ports in terms of world trade/location of ocean telecommunication cables/location of mines of platinum" etc. I still fail to see what the big deal is.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

This is some pretty serious political activism, and it's going to carry some pretty serious consequences.

Like, "end of 4chan" or "anonymous not nearly as anonymous as they thought when they were arrested" kind of serious.

So much for being "the final boss of the Internet", eh?

Frankly I don't think even the Anonymice can do anything now.

 

[qbanknight]

And by the way, Wikileaks not only revealed important facilities in America, but in UK and in many other countries. So yes, the radical-bombing members of the IRA could possibly use the list. Use your head.

I wonder how much of that list can't be found by Googling "Nuclear power plants/Airports/Factories/Docks/Major cities/whatever in UK/US/Austalia/whatever".

Read this because apparently no one on this fucking site does their homework like a damn adult:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041

You'll see their that these are PARTICULAR locales on the global supply change that could have damaging effects on trade, stocks, lives, currency, public opinion, etc.

Right then. So, Googling "stockpiles of medicenes/major oil pipelines/top ten ports in terms of world trade/location of ocean telecommunication cables/location of mines of platinum" etc. I still fail to see what the big deal is.

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

 

[Delusibeta]

And by the way, Wikileaks not only revealed important facilities in America, but in UK and in many other countries. So yes, the radical-bombing members of the IRA could possibly use the list. Use your head.

I wonder how much of that list can't be found by Googling "Nuclear power plants/Airports/Factories/Docks/Major cities/whatever in UK/US/Austalia/whatever".

Read this because apparently no one on this fucking site does their homework like a damn adult:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041

You'll see their that these are PARTICULAR locales on the global supply change that could have damaging effects on trade, stocks, lives, currency, public opinion, etc.

Right then. So, Googling "stockpiles of medicenes/major oil pipelines/top ten ports in terms of world trade/location of ocean telecommunication cables/location of mines of platinum" etc. I still fail to see what the big deal is.

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

Most bang for their buck? I fail to see how attacking the listed places trump, say, blowing up a nuclear power plant in terms of terror generated.

 

[qbanknight]

And by the way, Wikileaks not only revealed important facilities in America, but in UK and in many other countries. So yes, the radical-bombing members of the IRA could possibly use the list. Use your head.

I wonder how much of that list can't be found by Googling "Nuclear power plants/Airports/Factories/Docks/Major cities/whatever in UK/US/Austalia/whatever".

Read this because apparently no one on this fucking site does their homework like a damn adult:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041

You'll see their that these are PARTICULAR locales on the global supply change that could have damaging effects on trade, stocks, lives, currency, public opinion, etc.

Right then. So, Googling "stockpiles of medicenes/major oil pipelines/top ten ports in terms of world trade/location of ocean telecommunication cables/location of mines of platinum" etc. I still fail to see what the big deal is.

Blowing up a nuclear power plant is not very fucking easy. The security detail there is top notch with multiple clearances and hurdles to cross before you are even close enough to a plant to do some serious damage. Attacking other parts of international trade that typically do not have much security, is more viable. And this is what the list shows. Incredibly vulnerable points along the global supply change that will ruin everyone's day if any of those sites get attacked with a bomb or God knows what

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

Most bang for their buck? I fail to see how attacking the listed places trump, say, blowing up a nuclear power plant in terms of terror generated.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

Since when have terrorists attacked weak points on the global supply chain anyway. When was the last time you heard of terrorists even trying to attack a place like any of those listed.
Lets say you're planning a terrorist attack. You have two targets, one a defended nuclear facility, the other a shopping mall full of nice undefended squishy civilians, which one are you going to attack? Precedent shows that its the squishy civvies. Terrorist groups in action today lack the manpower, training and ability to attack such facilities as those listed. Maybe if we were at war with an enemy who had the capability to pull such attacks i would be there with you, but we aren't and even if we were, the global situation would have gone down the shitter anyway.

 

[deleted_scifidownbeat]

DELETED

 

[ph0b0s123]

No-one invoved in this has come out smelling of roses.

From the US government who's data protection messures (or lack of) allowed this to happen and who's subsequent response has been pathetic. To the spineless corperations who have bowed to percevied US government pressure. Also people who have DDOS'ed those corperations causing normal people problems.

And finally wikileaks and their leader who have that have made some releases that are not really in the public interest, like the one on strategic facilities. Or threataning un-censored releases if their leader is arrested.

But at the same time there has been stuff I quite liked. The US gorvenments cover ups over civilian casualities in their mis adventures being exposed. And spineless corperations being shown that some of their rubbish decisions are not without concequences.

One last thing is about the US's main two arguements that these releases either give their enemies propoganda, or puts lives in danger. For the first I say stop doing actions that would be good propoganda material for your enermies, then you don't have to cover them up. To the second I challange anyone to name one person who has died because of wikileaks releases. Can't, well neither as reported can the US gov....

 

[brumley53]

The only reason anyone is going along with this shit is because of a few main reasons

1. they actually dont know shit about whats happening.
2. they think they're some kind of vigilante justice bull shit.
3. they want to be like the myth of old Anon.

Honestly everyone is just jumping on whatever they can to be like the whole old /b/ thing, which is pretty ironic as they are trying to be famous as anynomous.

 

[cp2u]

I'm behind wikileaks all the way, but anonymous, as a concept is a double-edged blade. While they may start with good intentions, the fact that anyone can "join" anonymous means that idiots who just want to start problems will jump on board too.

 

[Danzaivar]

One thing's for sure. America is going to come out of this looking worse than Assange. If he gets out of the rape charge and doesn't get put in jail for it, he's gonna end up being killed, in suspicious but deniable circumstances.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

And by the way, Wikileaks not only revealed important facilities in America, but in UK and in many other countries. So yes, the radical-bombing members of the IRA could possibly use the list. Use your head.

I wonder how much of that list can't be found by Googling "Nuclear power plants/Airports/Factories/Docks/Major cities/whatever in UK/US/Austalia/whatever".

Read this because apparently no one on this fucking site does their homework like a damn adult:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/11932041

You'll see their that these are PARTICULAR locales on the global supply change that could have damaging effects on trade, stocks, lives, currency, public opinion, etc.

Right then. So, Googling "stockpiles of medicenes/major oil pipelines/top ten ports in terms of world trade/location of ocean telecommunication cables/location of mines of platinum" etc. I still fail to see what the big deal is.

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

I think you missed the point. The mere fact that you can obtain virtually all of the information vis-a-vis so called locations of national security presented in the leaked documents by a simple implies that said information was never particularly secret in the first place. If there is any increased vulnerability now, it is only because the security of said sites was never taken seriously beforehand. That being said, how difficult is it really to determine whether or not a particular building is of any importance? Government offices aren't easy to hide, neither are pipelines, military installations, mines, powerplants, airports, etc.

 

[Danzaivar]

Sigh, read closer. It said PARTICULAR, as in not all of them. True you could just Google the above phrases as a terrorist and a achieve a horrific result, but these sonsabitches want the MOST bang for their buck. So a convenient little list of particular locations has narrowed down the search for places considerably. Meaning now that these sites have to be extra careful and have some otherwise unnecessary security measures because some jack off told the world that their location was a weak point in the global supply chain

Erm terrorists go after civilians in densely populated areas when they want to terrorise. (There was this incident that's now known as "9/11" which is a pretty well known example.)

The only reason they'd go after sensitive government facilities (on which attacks would be covered up anyway) would be to destroy the US Government, which isn't gonna happen. They'll go after public places and kill civilians to scare the populace shitless.