Anonymous' Target Planned to "Take Down" WikiLeaks
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
1. I'm frightened of ANYONE with "too much power." As others have stated, Anonymous is not one group of specific people who all work together with a detailed structure and measures in place to prevent someone from MISUSING that power. Just as the Governments and companies Anon and Wikileaks attack can be "corrupt" or contain "corrupt individuals" so can ANY organization, INCLUDING Wikileaks and ANONYMOUS.h264 said:
2. Who decided that one immoral or illegal action is acceptable in order to fight another? If it's okay for wikileaks and anonymous to use any method necessary to further their goals, and to attack those they feel "Deserve it," then why are those that are attacked not allowed to defend themselves?
3. Has anyone bothered to ask Wikileaks and Anonymous in their idealistic little campaign what their feelings are on collateral damage? Bank of America, the U.S. Government, and other organizations are not small groups of 5 or six EVIL people hellbent on world domination and amassing personal wealth. They are MASSIVE corporations with so many parts and arms that it would be nearly impossible to detail all the parts or map out the whole. When Anonymous attacks, they inevitably must do so to innocent people who ultimately pay the price when the smoke clears. HBGary in and of itself is not necessarily a corrupt or evil COMPANY (assuming any of this is true), but they also undoubtedly employee hundreds of decent, hard-working committed people who have families and children to support. What about those people? Is it just "tough noogies, this is HB's fault for daring to even consider such an ill-advised plan!"
Or are we beyond caring about the "little guy" both Assange and Anonymous have claimed to be doing all of this selflessly for? If I worked for HBGary and ended up losing my job because some of my emails were in that pile (admittedly, not ALL of the emails were about the plot), I'd be PISSED. Not only that, some of those "Emails" might contain very personal information that shouldn't be released, between innocent people who were not part of this at all. That's been my big problem with Wikileaks... they release a buttload of documents that logistically would be incredibly difficult at BEST to entirely censor, assuming that some innocent person's banking information or social security number or intimate letter to his wife isn't included in there. Worse, who are the people scanning these documents for things to censor or to determine if they should be "released?" Certainly not anyone vetted or that has been openly determined to be "trustworthy." Some of wikileaks documents have been medical records. That's deeply PRIVATE, PERSONAL information that got caught up in the massive releases, and should have been caught. Has anyone been affected by this negatively? Who knows, but it sure doesn't make me think either one of these groups is fighting for me.
3. Who deigned them worthy champions in the first place? Anonymous to me seems like a "join us or else" organization. I've never much felt comfortable with rebellious groups that figure that anyone who does not back them 100% is cast into the "enemy" category by default. Worse, if they are so bent on freedom of speech, are we safe to criticize or openly choose to defy either organization without fear of reprisal? I have a feeling that if I started my own "anonymous organization" that's sole purpose was to monitor Anonymous and Wikileaks and police THEIR members for potential corruption, that it would be met with fierce and possibly aggressive resistance. I am confident they would engage in activities, hacking, and any other methods ACTIVELY seeking a way to discredit or destroy me simply for wanting to keep THEM honest.
Which brings me to my main point again..
Why SHOULD I be afraid (excusing the obvious) to openly oppose Anonymous? What, is "freedom" only a one way street? Why can't I oppose a corrupt government AND the questionable alliance of individuals whose motives are difficult if not impossible to truly ascertain without "fear?"
You say Anonymous fights for me, for my right to be free. But what about my right to be free from fear of Anonymous? Which member will give me assurances that they will not turn their hand on me or act against me or my family just for kicks? Who decides when I should be left alone or if they have made a mistake?
In other words, why should we accept Anonymous as judge, jury, AND executioner? Did they give ANY of these companies a chance to accept responsibility or even explain themselves before taking action? Did they approach them and say "We have these documents, want to tell us what this is about before we release them?" Will Anonymous be making efforts to help re-employ the innocent employees who WILL be losing their jobs as these companies fire people over this matter, or worse, have to downsize their employees because of lost profit?
Its easy to say "well nobody should work or want to work for a corrupt company anyway" until you actually have to put food on the table for your children. A starving child will make any parent toss their morals out a window.
So ultimately, I see no "heroes" anywhere here. Not Bank of America, not HBGary, not Anonymous, and not wikileaks.
I see a quartet of unsavory characters all around, each working towards their own suspicious means to fight each other over nonsense that in the end is ultimately irrelevant to the average person just trying to survive.
We all live in a sea of Sharks. That's just how the world works. The only thing you can do is try to avoid getting caught up in the occasional feeding frenzies.
Wikileaks is a source protection organization that provides a platform for people to give evidence of corruption and otherwise censored material.HyenaThePirate said:
The people giving them the leaks have the power here.
When these groups speak of free information, including the open source groups, they mean governments and organizations, people have a right to privacy, governements, organizations, and corporations are not people. The supreme court can keep trying to say they are so that corps can give money to politicians but they are not people. They can not be harmed in the same manners. Their freedom to exist can not be taken away in the same way.
Our entire government was set up on the idea of "trying to take power from others and give it to themselves" The founders stated it implicitly. The idea was for the states to fight the federal gov and to fight amongst themselves so nothing would every be accomplished except for when it absolutely needed to be. That's why the government is told what it can do not what it can not. Anything not stated is suppose to be out of the governments hands. Where any law to a citizen is suppose to be what you can't do so that you can do whatever you want without infringing apon the freedoms and liberties of other citizens. A non transparent government does nothing but keep the citizens uninformed and unable to make an educated vote.
What's wrong with striving to reach idealist principles? Even if you don't make it the end result is a hell of a lot better.
They would be employees by todays standards and all that happened is we all agreed on a code of conduct pushed out by unions. Unions being that large group that stood up at one time to make a change. Which goes back to my other point of when the government is suppose to make changes.
-Mark
LEAVE WIKILEAKS ALONE!
please, cmon, we all know the US government is pissed at Mr.assange because he spread their dirty lil' secrets
please, cmon, we all know the US government is pissed at Mr.assange because he spread their dirty lil' secrets
Ah, deluded yerself. I don't want to know if my government if a bunch of backstabbing greedy scumbags. I don't want to know if I'm being bled dry. I just want to make it through my life with as little turbulence as possible, okay? And some whistle-blower who's running around making the people in charge as annoyed as possible, and just basically flinging shit everywhere. It's disorderly, it's irritating, and it's unnecessary. The government's corrupt, you say? No fucking shit, Julian! Didn't need classified documents to figure that out!Droppa Deuce said:
Based on this evidence, maybe we should hire some of those evil PMCs I keep hearing about to go ruin some offices at certain security firms.
It's kind of like paying Emperor Palpatine to zap Sauron in the groin.
It's kind of like paying Emperor Palpatine to zap Sauron in the groin.
Things don't change until somebody starts flinging the dog doo, though. If everyone believed like you, you'd still be working 80 hours a week at some sweat shop so you could earn the few dollars a week you desperately needed for heat, and every winter the natural gas/electric company would increase their rates 200%, causing the deaths of thousands by making heat unavailable to the lower classes.Pandaman1911 said:
You know, like your great grandfather did before The Jungle got published by another filthy whistleblower.
Considering that historically, whistle-blowing has pretty much only ever HELPED the common man (and unless your sitting in an office at the top floor of the skyscraper you own, this is you), you should be thanking Mr. Assange.
They may not be revelations but it is providing evidence of these things. Which is exactly what is needed before actions can be taken against those responsible.Samurai Goomba said:
If you try to dismiss this evidence, just remember the government has not denied any of it. Instead they are doing their best to prosecute Assange for releasing information of corruption and questionable activities.
Does it not concern you that some of the tax payers money has gone to help pimp little boys? Does it not concern you that your tax paying money is supporting these people?
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/07/report-wikileaks-cab.html
Check my post on page 5 for other things wikileaks has revealed.
I guess you missed this part:Vareoth said:
Palantir Apologizes for Wikileaks Attack Proposal, Cuts Ties with HBGary
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2011/02/11/palantir-apologizes-for-wikileaks-attack-proposal-cuts-ties-with-hbgary/
Press statement from Palantir: http://palantirtech.com/statement-from-dr-alex-karp
Berico Technologies severs ties with HBGary
http://www.bericotechnologies.com/press/
Press statement from Berico: http://bericotech.com/press/
Palantir Tries to Preserve Their Government Contracts
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2011/02/10/palantir-tries-to-preserve-their-government-contracts/
Hoglund?s company which, he claims, provides ?classified services to the Department of Defense, the Intelligence Community and other U.S. Government agencies to meet their unique requirement?, is now effectively on the trash heap.
My old mans an anon with a keyboard and a mouse,
I haven't seen him lately cos he never leaves the house!
He looks so really trendy in his hoody and DM boots,
much cooler than those other dads with ties and shirts and suits!
dum dee dum dee dum *starts playing fiddle*
Now where's me Little Armalite?
I haven't seen him lately cos he never leaves the house!
He looks so really trendy in his hoody and DM boots,
much cooler than those other dads with ties and shirts and suits!
dum dee dum dee dum *starts playing fiddle*
Now where's me Little Armalite?
You do not need to forge 60k documents to create propaganda. You just need to forge a few and splice it into the mess. Allowing the people misinform themselves.Greg Tito said:
I'm not saying that is what Anon did... I'm just presenting your flaw in your thinking.
I have seen this stuff happen when politics with racial agenda cross heads with mom & pop stores opening in the "wrong" racial sector.
If those damn pollies and legitimate biznessmen are so worried about being exposed in this manner than should really get the spinal surgery done so that they can pull their heads out. Then with their view much less impaired they might see that engaging in the activities that draw in those like Anon' is a bad idea. Just sayin'...
