Anonymous used to be evil now they can just be described as "Chaotic Neutral" I mean they used to attack innocent people and now all they do is attack internet camwhores and morons.
Anonymous Punishes the Oregon Tea Party
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Anonymous has no organization or leadership or anything, any of them can do what they want and much of it is retarded because its not like they all need to be on board for it.Celtic_Kerr said:
There are also two Anonymous group: Those who run Project Chanology and are semi-respected, and the splinter group that just do things "for the lulz" as they say.
As for the epilepsy thing, as there is no proof I am inclined to believe it is the Scientologists. When Anonymous does something, you KNOW that it's them because that's where the fun lies for them. And notice how its the Scientologists going for the aid of an Epilepsy Foundation for some odd reason.
From wiki here are things that are more of Anonymous' type of thing:
1. No Cussing Club
In January 2009 members of Anonymous targeted California teen McKay Hatch who runs the No Cussing Club, a website against profanity.[54][55] As Hatch's home address phone number, and other personal information were leaked online, his family has received much hate mail, obscene phone calls, and bogus pizza and pornography deliveries.[56]
]
2. YouTube porn day
On May 20, 2009, members of Anonymous uploaded numerous pornographic videos onto YouTube.[57] Many of these videos were disguised as children's videos or family friendly videos with tags such as "jonas brothers".[57] YouTube has since removed all videos uploaded. The BBC contacted one of the uploaders who stated that it was a '4chan raid' organised due to the removal of music videos from YouTube.[58] BBC News reported that one victim posted a comment saying: "I'm 12 years old and what is this?"[58] which went on to become an internet meme.
Operation Titstorm
3. Main article: Operation Titstorm
Occurred from 8am, February 10, 2010 as a protest against the Australian Government over the forthcoming internet filtering legislation and the perceived censorship in pornography of small-breasted women (who are thought to be under age) and female ejaculation. The protest consisted of a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS) on Australian Government websites. The Australian anti-censorship groups complained that the attack only hurts their cause, and Australian government members dismissed the attack and said that they would just restore the service when the attack finished.[59][60] Analysis of the attacks cited their peak bandwidth at under 17Mbit, a figure considered small when compared with other DDoS attacks.[61]
Yet every time I've asked anyone to refute one of The Daily Show's generally well-researched arguments, all I get is more nonsensical name-calling and demands that "we," whoever that is, need to "think for ourselves" and "not listen to the mainstream media." You've just done it here. And you're offering up the good ol' logical fallacies by the shovelful. I'm really starting to get pissed off every time someone spits out the "Now, I don't believe everything <O'Reilly/Limbaugh/Hannity/CunCoulter> says, but they're better than them Jon Daily Show communists" bullshit.Sir John The Net Knight said:
I always like to note that Stewart has videos, full-length, in-context, to back him up, whenever a talking-head on Fox decides to spew nonsense. CNN and MSNBC either don't have the staff or the balls to actually call news orgs and our government out when they lie. And, unlike Fox and CNN, TDS calls foul on *everyone*.
The other reason I trust The Daily Show more than any other news programme? When Stewart has a guest on, he doesn't *SCREAM* at them. Everyone is polite, they have civil discourse, and then part ways.
Well, let's not forget that this is a group naming itself after the "Boston Tea Party" and what was an act of politically motivated civil disobeidience. It's not surprising that they admire Anonymous and it's tactics to an extent.
Otherwise, I'll refrain from commenting. I tend to go far more Republican than Democrat when it comes to politics as many people know, and represent a minority here. I won't comment on Glen Beck, but I will say that I am hardly a fan of Barack Obama even if I don't go in for some of the crazier conspiricy theories, he's done enough to annoy me where you don't even need any outlandish accusations as far as I'm concerned (and no, this isn't the time or place for a rant about him, I'm sure it will come up again in other threads at some point). The "Tea Party" is a mixed bag like many groups cut from the same cloth, I agree with them on some things, disagree with them on others.
Otherwise, I'll refrain from commenting. I tend to go far more Republican than Democrat when it comes to politics as many people know, and represent a minority here. I won't comment on Glen Beck, but I will say that I am hardly a fan of Barack Obama even if I don't go in for some of the crazier conspiricy theories, he's done enough to annoy me where you don't even need any outlandish accusations as far as I'm concerned (and no, this isn't the time or place for a rant about him, I'm sure it will come up again in other threads at some point). The "Tea Party" is a mixed bag like many groups cut from the same cloth, I agree with them on some things, disagree with them on others.
True, but does that mean that there is a political party in America, or at least Oregon called the tea party? because that sounds strange, even for the name of a political party.RvLeshrac said:
Why would a conservative political party want a slogan including the phrase "we do not forgive"? It doesn't sound like something that would attract new voters, which is ultimately what they want from the event.
Not really, I view most conservative politicians as slime bags. Hell, I've been at several conservative parties in Canada (I've even met the old finance minister for instance) thanks to some well connected friends of mine and that really helped cement my views that they basically just want to be rich at any cost. If that meant resorting to anon like tactics to flame competition, I have no doubt they would do it.Andy Chalk said:
Okay first, they are NOT an ORGANISATION!Lono Shrugged said:
There is NOTHING remotely organized about them.
They set a goal that seems to stop them or innocent people from getting lulz, set a date and rape them in any way they can archieve.
You might not like their methods, but they don´t care...and you can´t stop them because if you take down ALL of anonymous right now, their would be another 1000 by tomorrow doing the same thing...
You also can´t blame them for their methods, as the INDIVIDUALS do it...there is noone signing a paper that sais "This is how we do it." but simply sais "Raid this, then!" and it´s set.
You don´t respect them? Fine, they don´t need respect, as they are everyone and noone.
And since most seem to be Computer wizzes that know their hacking, they also use hacking.
They even cut off government sites in...I think it was Australia because of their voilent games ban.
On the Scientology thing, the fact that they are not a valid church but a sect and that they rip people off their money are enough reasons for Anonymous to attack...also Scientology answered with lawyers and threats on their own, which vaporized since there is noone to sue...
And they organized WORLD WIDE DEMONSTRATIONS ON EXACTLY THE SAME TIME AND DATE infront of every Scientology presence that matters...project Chanology...