FBI Arrests 14 in Raids Against Anonymous

[Korolev]

I also really want to hammer home this analogy: Anonymous are bound by no rules. There is NO oversight, NO ONE keeps track of what they are doing. You have no way of knowing what they are doing, or for what reasons, and given that the group is super-diverse and dispersed, there probably is no one reason why the members of anonymous do what they do. Some do it to expose corruption, but others are probably 20-something anarchists looking for any excuse to "smash" the "system", simply because they can't win elections due to their own craziness.

(On a side note, Anarchists always make me laugh: They claim to stand for "the people" and "against the oppressors", yet even in the fairest elections they never, EVER win. Anarchists, if you really were what the people wanted, they'd vote for you. Believe it or not, some of us don't want to live on hippie communes eating organic carrots).

The fact that so many trust them openly and blindly is laughable. You don't trust the government. You don't trust corporations. But you're going to trust these people, who you can't see, who you can't investigate, who have no real set goals or motives? It's like the 50's all over again, when you had deluded college students supporting the communists (and look how nice those guys turned out to be!).

Some of you still look at this as a fight between "Good" and "Evil" with all corporations being on the side of "Evil" and all Anonymous hackers being on the side of "Good", as if this was some sort of fairy tale. Evil and Good exists on BOTH sides of the line - do you know how much Bill Gates has given to Malaria research? And do you know that some hacktivists have targeted websites that have done no harm to anyone (The Escapist for one).

Before you start, no, I don't trust corps. Corps are inherently greedy. That's their very nature and they've done some heinous crimes in the past. Shell oil (formerly Anglo-Iranian Oil) was one of the major players who brought down the Democratically elected Iranian government and replaced it with the brutal Shah (CIA also helped). Shell Oil has also been pretty horrible to the Nigerian Coastal Communities. We all know how corrupt Enron was and how much pain they caused. Blackwater PMC (now called Xe) has been implicated in human trafficking, drug dealing and civilian killing in Iraq - the US government themselves have uncovered these crimes committed by the amoral Blackwater company. Kellogg-Brown, the Logistics company that operates in Iraq, locked up their own employees illegally when they tried to complain of sexual assault suffered at the hands of their fellow workers. So no, I don't trust Corps. I view them with intense mistrust and suspicion.

Yet at the same time, if you are going to trust any long-haired, gun waving, self-proclaimed "Freedom Fighter", you're just as much of a sheep as those who do trust corps. The Khmer Rouge was a bunch of French-educated, Peasant-backed, AK-47 wielding "Freedom Fighters" and look how awful they turned out to be. Just because someone SAYS they are standing up against "The Man", doesn't mean their heart is pure or their intentions noble. So many silly students in America explicitly supported the Viet Cong, and NOW look at the Vietnamese government - they're far more oppressive than the US government.

I'm not saying that Anonymous are like the Khmer's - far from it. They're mostly just a bunch of deluded folks who have read one Noam Chomsky book and think they know everything about the world. Now, I like Noam Chomsky to a degree - he does stand up against genuine US oppression when it happens, and it HAS happened - but I think he's a bit preachy and far too simplistic in his political views. The US isn't the only evil bad-guy. Corps aren't entirely evil either. There are many nations FAR WORSE than the US, and there are many useful Corps that make our lives better. I'm a scientist - I depend on Corps to do my work. When I order a plasmid, it's a Corp that makes it. When I need to sequence said plasmid to check for errors, I send it off to a Corp. When I need to spin down tubes, I use a microcentrifuge built by a Corp. When I need to do a PCR, I use buffers and Polymerases made by Corps. I need Corps to do Science. Get rid of Corps, get rid of science. You can't do a PCR reaction on a commune with hippies. You can't live in a forest and still have micro-filters for purifying anti-biotics. Like or not, Modern day Science REQUIRES ENORMOUS resources. You have no idea how many Pipette tips we go through in the course of a day - and we need factories to MAKE such Pipette tips and Eppendorf or Falcon Tubes or produce the chemicals we need. I'd really just LOVE to see an Anarchist commune try to fabricate some Hydrochloric acid or Chloroform or Tetrodotoxin in the amount and purity we scientists need. Because I know they can't.

We need society. We NEED the system. Modern day science requires it. Because it is ONLY the system that can concentrate the resources necessary for my research. I can't heatshock and transform my cells in a hut. I need UV cabinets, I need hot-water baths, I need plastics and glass-ware, auto-claves and micro-pulsers and cuvettes, I need fridges and centrifuges and I need computers and I need all manner of chemicals and I need electricity to run all that stuff. Who's gonna make that stuff for me? The Hippies? I should think NOT!

But that's another topic entirely - back to Anonymous: I don't like them. Unlike with Wikileaks (who I do support), there is no accountability, no set mission structure.

Again: If a Gang of masked youths wandered to your house and said "we suspect you might be doing some crimes. Mind if we take a look? We won't steal anything, HONEST. You can TRUST US. And if anyone of us DOES steal something, then we'll claim that they're not part of us. No? You won't let us in? Well screw you buddy, we're breaking in, whether you like it or not! And if anything DOES go missing, we'll do nothing to help you and disown anyone of us who does anything bad!".

People hate governments and corps because they think there's too little oversight. What oversight, I ask you, is there over anonymous? None. They can't even police themselves because they don't know each other's identities! And you trust these people? You're happy with letting do whatever the heck they want?

"Oh," you cry, "But they're the PEOPLE! They wouldn't do anything bad! They're poor". Human nature is the same regardless of wealth. The Bolsheviks were, I remind you, originally peasants. And look how bloody vicious they turned out to be (Ukrainian Famine anyone!?). Just because Anonymous are the "little" guys doesn't mean they are nice or wholesome. Rich people can be evil, but Peasants can be just as quick to grab a pitchfork and lynch people.

You can't trust Anonymous. You have no idea who they are. How can you trust them, then?

 

[kikon9]

Meh, good for them, I've stopped caring about most things having to do with anonymous. Of course, since they're a bunch of annoying hackers, I'm glad to hear that some of them got arrested.

 

[senordesol]

I'm surprised by the amount of people crying 'free speech'. Free speech is speaking out against a company for its practices and entreating people not to shop there; not shutting down the same company's financial infrastructure.

Same goes for any attack on a government site that denies the public (or the government) the use of that sites services.

It's terrorism. I'd much rather THIS species of terrorism rather than the 'blow up a market full of people' species. But terrorism all the same. It is not the same as chaining one's self to a store; it's like shutting down an entire company.

It's illegal, and we shouldn't stand for it.

 

[Wintermute_]

Those poor little angels, they should have locked their mums garage doors then the FBI wouldn't get to them.
This is what happens to people who stand up for Truth and Justice and other pathetic ideals that people think can only be achieved by hacking and making the internet a shitty place.
Keep fighting you brave, masculine heroes. While you fall this day, your brothers are ready to take up arms and make a few websites crash, Batman would be proud.

Why the harshness? It really bothers me that people who disagree with the methods of anonymous feel inclined to brush them off as some stereotypical 40-yr-od virgin loser nerds living in their parents house. you don't know these people. just because they're computer savvy doesn't make 'em freaks. Probably very intelligent, average geeky guys, much like yourself if your using this site. And wtf do you mean making the internet a shitty pace? anonymous hasn't done jack shit to you or me or even 1% of internet users. like, really, what have they done to fuck with anyones day to day usage of the internet?

and pardon? pathetic idea of truth and justice? those are very noble principles. I concede that anonymous goes over the top (if not laughably so) with their whole "for justice and truth" and free speech above all angle, but hell, at least these individuals are using their skills to accomplish an ends they find to be worthy of investing their time in, enough to get a response from people. what have you done lately that was so important and got fbi grade attention and?

Ultimately however, why does what anonymous does bother ANYONE? what they do exposes and brings media attention to some very important issues, and yeah, these people aren't fucking batman. Perhaps its apathy keeping me from being to concerned, but after I close this laptop, anonymous can't do anything to me.

 

[senordesol]

[/quote]That there is some nice black and white thinking. So, you're starving, and there's this loaf of bread...[/quote]

Anonymous isn't being denied a vital resource that is desperately needed (not that stealing that same loaf of bread would be any less illegal). Indeed, anonymous ITSELF, is denying others THEIR daily bread by paralyzing their ability to do business.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Dammit FBI! Forget Anonymous, they're not that bad. At least when they attack, it's either for a semi-good reason, or it's actually funny. Well...Most of the time, anyway.

Why don't you just go bust Lulzsec instead? Those guys deserve to get owned. They attack on whims, and the result is not funny, nor does it serve any positive purpose EVER.

 

[Android2137]

They haven't actually stolen any info from Paypal, have they? Those with accounts are not in any danger, are they?

 

[SeriousIssues]

I don't think "Anonymous" is even real.
There are workers unions, gay rights organizations, etc all fighting for the same cause, and the WWF fights for lots of animal causes, but Anonymous?
It's a loose banner any one can use, its not the same 3 mouthbreathers going down a bucketlist.

Sites should improve security and the FBI go after those responsible for more serious crimes, but to fight "Anonymous" is the same as fighting "Terrorism".

Not that the culprits don't deserve to be some giant's ***** in prison for a few years, they really don't have a right to crash sites. It's just not the same as protesting in real life.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Stop going after Anon and go after Lulzsec, geniuses. They're the immediate thread and are far more dangerous than Anon.

This, this this THIS!

I personally don't think it's worth going after any of them, but if we do, go after lulzsec.

Anononyous has a goal, good intentions, and hasn't done much illegal stuff.

Though I suppose thats the very reason why they are going after anon, they are the bigger threat to THEM.

Snip.

This is true.

But we can gauge their intentions by looking at their actions

 

[t3h br0th3r]

This is going to be interesting. The real question here is how to you A: prove they were in a group you can join and leave on a whim and B: Prove they were doing illegal stuff. How do we know the FBI didn;t just get 14 peps who were just there for the lulz, or to take down Egyptian and Libyan government sites(two objectives that made me consider joining).

 

[Xaio30]

Good morning FBI! Today's headline is:
"Anonymous is an ideal, not an organization"

 

[Tharwen]

They don't get it. Anonymous is everyone who stands up to fight injustice, corruption and censorship.

If I do it and hide my name I'm Anonymous. And every time I hear about governments stomping down on people trying to make the world a better place I'm more tempted to join them.

That simply doesn't change the fact that they did the things that they've been arrested for.

The fact that there's no member list doesn't mean that they're immune to punishment.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

I also really want to hammer home this analogy: Anonymous are bound by no rules. There is NO oversight, NO ONE keeps track of what they are doing. You have no way of knowing what they are doing, or for what reasons, and given that the group is super-diverse and dispersed, there probably is no one reason why the members of anonymous do what they do. Some do it to expose corruption, but others are probably 20-something anarchists looking for any excuse to "smash" the "system", simply because they can't win elections due to their own craziness.

(On a side note, Anarchists always make me laugh: They claim to stand for "the people" and "against the oppressors", yet even in the fairest elections they never, EVER win. Anarchists, if you really were what the people wanted, they'd vote for you. Believe it or not, some of us don't want to live on hippie communes eating organic carrots).

The fact that so many trust them openly and blindly is laughable. You don't trust the government. You don't trust corporations. But you're going to trust these people, who you can't see, who you can't investigate, who have no real set goals or motives? It's like the 50's all over again, when you had deluded college students supporting the communists (and look how nice those guys turned out to be!).

Some of you still look at this as a fight between "Good" and "Evil" with all corporations being on the side of "Evil" and all Anonymous hackers being on the side of "Good", as if this was some sort of fairy tale. Evil and Good exists on BOTH sides of the line - do you know how much Bill Gates has given to Malaria research? And do you know that some hacktivists have targeted websites that have done no harm to anyone (The Escapist for one).

Before you start, no, I don't trust corps. Corps are inherently greedy. That's their very nature and they've done some heinous crimes in the past. Shell oil (formerly Anglo-Iranian Oil) was one of the major players who brought down the Democratically elected Iranian government and replaced it with the brutal Shah (CIA also helped). Shell Oil has also been pretty horrible to the Nigerian Coastal Communities. We all know how corrupt Enron was and how much pain they caused. Blackwater PMC (now called Xe) has been implicated in human trafficking, drug dealing and civilian killing in Iraq - the US government themselves have uncovered these crimes committed by the amoral Blackwater company. Kellogg-Brown, the Logistics company that operates in Iraq, locked up their own employees illegally when they tried to complain of sexual assault suffered at the hands of their fellow workers. So no, I don't trust Corps. I view them with intense mistrust and suspicion.

Yet at the same time, if you are going to trust any long-haired, gun waving, self-proclaimed "Freedom Fighter", you're just as much of a sheep as those who do trust corps. The Khmer Rouge was a bunch of French-educated, Peasant-backed, AK-47 wielding "Freedom Fighters" and look how awful they turned out to be. Just because someone SAYS they are standing up against "The Man", doesn't mean their heart is pure or their intentions noble. So many silly students in America explicitly supported the Viet Cong, and NOW look at the Vietnamese government - they're far more oppressive than the US government.

I'm not saying that Anonymous are like the Khmer's - far from it. They're mostly just a bunch of deluded folks who have read one Noam Chomsky book and think they know everything about the world. Now, I like Noam Chomsky to a degree - he does stand up against genuine US oppression when it happens, and it HAS happened - but I think he's a bit preachy and far too simplistic in his political views. The US isn't the only evil bad-guy. Corps aren't entirely evil either. There are many nations FAR WORSE than the US, and there are many useful Corps that make our lives better. I'm a scientist - I depend on Corps to do my work. When I order a plasmid, it's a Corp that makes it. When I need to sequence said plasmid to check for errors, I send it off to a Corp. When I need to spin down tubes, I use a microcentrifuge built by a Corp. When I need to do a PCR, I use buffers and Polymerases made by Corps. I need Corps to do Science. Get rid of Corps, get rid of science. You can't do a PCR reaction on a commune with hippies. You can't live in a forest and still have micro-filters for purifying anti-biotics. Like or not, Modern day Science REQUIRES ENORMOUS resources. You have no idea how many Pipette tips we go through in the course of a day - and we need factories to MAKE such Pipette tips and Eppendorf or Falcon Tubes or produce the chemicals we need. I'd really just LOVE to see an Anarchist commune try to fabricate some Hydrochloric acid or Chloroform or Tetrodotoxin in the amount and purity we scientists need. Because I know they can't.

We need society. We NEED the system. Modern day science requires it. Because it is ONLY the system that can concentrate the resources necessary for my research. I can't heatshock and transform my cells in a hut. I need UV cabinets, I need hot-water baths, I need plastics and glass-ware, auto-claves and micro-pulsers and cuvettes, I need fridges and centrifuges and I need computers and I need all manner of chemicals and I need electricity to run all that stuff. Who's gonna make that stuff for me? The Hippies? I should think NOT!

But that's another topic entirely - back to Anonymous: I don't like them. Unlike with Wikileaks (who I do support), there is no accountability, no set mission structure.

Again: If a Gang of masked youths wandered to your house and said "we suspect you might be doing some crimes. Mind if we take a look? We won't steal anything, HONEST. You can TRUST US. And if anyone of us DOES steal something, then we'll claim that they're not part of us. No? You won't let us in? Well screw you buddy, we're breaking in, whether you like it or not! And if anything DOES go missing, we'll do nothing to help you and disown anyone of us who does anything bad!".

People hate governments and corps because they think there's too little oversight. What oversight, I ask you, is there over anonymous? None. They can't even police themselves because they don't know each other's identities! And you trust these people? You're happy with letting do whatever the heck they want?

"Oh," you cry, "But they're the PEOPLE! They wouldn't do anything bad! They're poor". Human nature is the same regardless of wealth. The Bolsheviks were, I remind you, originally peasants. And look how bloody vicious they turned out to be (Ukrainian Famine anyone!?). Just because Anonymous are the "little" guys doesn't mean they are nice or wholesome. Rich people can be evil, but Peasants can be just as quick to grab a pitchfork and lynch people.

You can't trust Anonymous. You have no idea who they are. How can you trust them, then?

This.. is pretty much the end of the discussion. Well put, to the point, and practically unopposable. Any attempt to counter this would just be to for the glory of Anonymous fan-boying.
Well said. I wish someone could put this in print in every paper, journal, and blog in the world.
Of course, Anonymous (or someone from it) would just hack those blogs and this writer's personal information, and then probably threaten his family, livlihood, and essentially his freedom to disagree.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Say what you will about Anonymous' ideals and principles, they are guilty on several occasions of cyber terrorism. Though I do agree that they don't deserve to have the FBI up their asses as much as some other groups.

This. Except for the fact that yes, they do deserve an FBI colonoscopy. They broke the law(s). They'll be taken to account for it.

 

[Sovvolf]

snip

That's a sensible and well thought out post... Too bad its probably a waste. Most will either brush past it or ignore it. Too bad really, you made some good points.

Also, is it just in to vehemently defend any criminal waving under the anon banner these days? You know, a group that apparently anyone can ride under without leadership or restrictions? Anyone caught regardless of crime tends to have the internet riding at their side. Maybe they should be judged on the crime and not their allegiance to a group that anyone can say they're a part of?

 

[ResonanceSD]

This is going to be interesting. The real question here is how to you A: prove they were in a group you can join and leave on a whim and B: Prove they were doing illegal stuff. How do we know the FBI didn;t just get 14 peps who were just there for the lulz, or to take down Egyptian and Libyan government sites(two objectives that made me consider joining).

That shit is still illegal.


And seriously. I would pay a lot of money to watch an FBI agent punch out a script kiddie whilst shouting STOP RIGHT THERE, CRIMINAL SCUM.