'Anonymous' group a tool of the CIA?

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I believe the CIA, Mossad, FBI, or some other shadowy alphabet government agency could not only be behind the information we've been seeing coming out of wikileaks - but they could also be behind, or encouraging, the internet group "Anonymous" which seeks to 'defend anonymous free speech'.


Former Pakistani General: CIA, Mossad behind WikiLeaks Reports



TEHRAN (FNA)- A former Pakistani army commander said that the disclosure of classified documents by the whistleblower site of Wikileaks is a US plot to create rift among friendly and neighboring states.


Whether or not wikileaks and anonymous were created by the CIA, or were hijacked by the CIA, or were legitimate operations that the CIA is using to steer public opinion, there is little doubt in my mind that the groups are, indeed, catalysts for something greater than their stated purpose.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt has said anonymity on the Internet is dangerous


Arguing that anonymity on the Internet is dangerous, Schmidt had reportedly said, "In a world of asynchronous threats, it is too dangerous for there not to be some way to identify you."

He also said governments may eventually put an end to anonymity. "We need a (verified) name service for people," he said. "Governments will demand it."


It's dangerous to not be able to identify me? Why? Where is the danger in that? Governments will DEMAND that internet users be identified? Why? Where will this demand stem from?

Last summer the FBI quietly established a special working group with U.S. intelligence and other agencies to identify and respond to cyber threats against the United States.


The bureau's justification for next year's budget, in which it has requested an additional 70 agents and more than 100 support personnel for its cyber division, says the task force "seeks to address cyber intrusions presenting a national security threat."

The budget justification says the task force will "develop a global view of information warfare activity; identify intelligence gaps; create a strategic framework to develop operations; de-conflict investigations and operations (and) generate timely intelligence."


Obviously the infrastructure for seeking out these online threats to "national security" has been in place for a couple years now if not more. All these letter agencies need now is someone or something to shed a public light on the cyber threats America is facing.

Link to quote...

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told a bloggers' roundtable last month that cybersecurity was "the one area in which I feel we've been behind where I would like to be."

"The general public is not aware (enough) of the threats," he said. "People need to be sensitized to potential vulnerabilities"


Wikileaks is the perfect opportunity to get the public aware about the threats we face from the cyber domain. But where did their documents come from? Anyone can submit information to wikileaks. If the info is from Private Manning, how did a private get access to so many classified documents? Did someone maybe have foreknowledge that he would do what he did? Something doesn't add up, but let's forget about that, because according to a Rasmussen Poll, the Majority Of Americans Believe WikiLeaks Committed Treason.


Now whether or not the poll is accurate is another question, but don't let that stop you from believing that these internet 'bad guys' need reigning in. Not only does our country have classified information being sent around the globe via the web, risking our national security, but a second cyber threat has popped up in direct response to dealing with the first!

MasterCard.com has been taken down after a second distributed denial of service attack by Anonymous.


MasterCard's payment processing systems were affected during the first DDoS attack on Wednesday, with many consumers reporting that they were unable to pay for goods online. Businesses reported a corresponding drop in trade during that first attack.


You mess with classified information, and sure some citizens might get upset over the principle of the matter - but they'll move on with their life. People have short memories.

You mess with their money, though, and watch out. There's nothing a consumer society will condemn more than those who try to put the brakes on their consumerism. Can't buy gas? Can't play on e-bay? Can't Christmas shop? "It's those evil internet hackers, the anonymous ones. Damn that anonymity to hell." The people, and the government, soon will be seeking... no, DEMANDING, the END of internet anonymity.

And for what? What purpose does it serve?

A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:


Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.


To sum this all up, whether or not there are alphabet agencies involved in this recent internet wikileaks/anonymous drama that's been unfolding before our eyes, we need to remain very vigilant about what direction these events are taking us.

I do believe there are tyrannical forces at work around the world, not always successful, but they are exerting their influence on people, on governments, and on corporations. To destroy anonymity, and thereby reducing open dissent, would be a step towards an Orwellian police-state. Could there be other motives to destroy net anonymity? Sure - I'd love to hear some ideas. All you have to do is find out WHO BENEFITS? Follow "the money" as it were.

And I'll leave you with this.

Secrecy is the cornerstone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy...censorship. When any government, or any church, for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mightily little force is needed to control a man who has been hoodwinked...

Contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; The most you can do is kill him.

- Robert A. Heinlein, If This Goes On, 1940




posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
i have suspected this for quite some time.

i believe its a select few, that "encourage" (perfect word) the army of 15 year olds.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Your OP asks:


Wikileaks is the perfect opportunity to get the public aware about the threats we face from the cyber domain. But where did their documents come from? Anyone can submit information to wikileaks. If the info is from Private Manning, how did a private get access to so many classified documents? Did someone maybe have foreknowledge that he would do what he did?

 



Private Manning could be just a documents clerk... i was one for 3 years and had either access to or was typing letters/documents/reports for both the Army Engineers, NATO, and other Orgs.
99% of the material is likely outdated or declassified by now.
But that is one explaination of just how a Private could access the cache' of material
.... WarRoom access would be another matter


Second---- the copy machines might have been bugged with undetectable methods of capturing
messages, diplomatic pouches, copies of e-mails that were electronically sent, even NATO
and other treaty Organizations material...may have been siphoned off into electronic vaults
owned and operated by spy networks, (foreign or domestic is the real question)



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by againuntodust

If the info is from Private Manning, how did a private get access to so many classified documents? Did someone maybe have foreknowledge that he would do what he did?


The commission investigating the terrorist attacks of 9/11 found that "poor information sharing was the single greatest failure of our government in the lead-up to the 9/11 attacks,"

The State Department created something that went by the unlovely name of Net-Centric Diplomacy database, or NCD. The department stored classified information on the database right up to the top-secret level. Agencies across the government had access to State's information through their own secure networks. The Pentagon's network, created in 1995, was called the Secure Internet Protocol Router Network, or SIPRNet, and was available to everyone from top officers in the Pentagon to troops in the field helping to track intelligence for their units. Read more: www.time.com...



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
i have suspected this for quite some time.

i believe its a select few, that "encourage" (perfect word) the army of 15 year olds.



Which 15 year olds? I thought this thread was about anonymous?

Or are you the type who believes that anonymous belongs to 4chan, and thus have absolutely no idea what you are talking about?



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Freedom_is_Slavery
 


Good link. I somehow doubt, though, that the US relaxed themselves in the handling of confidential material in the post Cold War era, as the article asserts. I also doubt that there was any gap in sharing knowledge; in my opinion that was just a farce used to justify a.) inaction on 9/11, and b.) an increase in those agencies budgets. The government (and especially the military and alphabet agencies), despite enjoying the citizenry believing it, is not stupid. They rule the world.
edit on 12-12-2010 by againuntodust because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


no, i believe anon influences 4chan.

whether you want to admit it or not, is irrelevant.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Anonymous can be anyone!

Of course the CIA and other organisations will use Anonymity as a tool, but 99% of anonymous is NOT CIA. Anonymous is anyone who has covered their computer tracks, and does something to be anonymous.. ANYONE!



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


I agree with you. The anonymous I'm referring to, are the members responsible for breaking the law in the name of freedom, those individuals behind the keyboard. All combined efforts require guidance; where did their guidance come from? We know the CIA is actively "luring" potential terrorists into pseudo-terror acts, posing themselves as a terror organization in order to provide guidance to would-be terrorists, and "cut them off at the pass", if you will.

No reason they couldn't do the same with a coordinated effort such as denial of service attacks.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by againuntodust
 


Well if you did your research, you'd find the attacks were 'organised' via collective discussion on public IRC channels and no single person made a decision.

I was witness to such a discussion and i can honestly say that no 'anonymous member' has any more control over anything than any other.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by againuntodust
 


I agree. When I was younger, 17-20, I had many run ins with operatives. It is rather scary how they infiltrate our younger citizens and warp their attitudes. They are very noticeable though. I feel the best we can do is inform and make people aware that we have a bunch of operatives running around trying to persuade you to do something you may not feel is relevant. Though when you see them as a "cool" guy, you feel you want to impress them, but this is not the case.. they are weak, which is why they feel the need to manipulate our younger generations. If I had known better, I would have hospitalized them. Governments think they can corrupt a minor, and get away with it.

Not to say they may not infiltrate us as older adults, just more noticeable to the younger ones.,.

sad



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


i dont think hes talking about control i think hes talking about influence.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Regardless of how these actions come to pass, we have to keep in mind that we can not allow the tools of communication and free speech to be taken from us, under any circumstances.

We have these rights BECAUSE they can be used as weapons. Our constitutional protections are not negotiable. They exist SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of insurrection. The last line of defense against the usurpation of our rights is the use of those rights to destroy the threat.

Our founders weren't a bunch of sissies. They knew the day would come when the American people would be forced, by the corruption of their own government, to revolt once again.

They wrote about it again and again.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard
reply to post by againuntodust
 


Well if you did your research, you'd find the attacks were 'organised' via collective discussion on public IRC channels and no single person made a decision.

I was witness to such a discussion and i can honestly say that no 'anonymous member' has any more control over anything than any other.


I can believe that to a degree... obviously some people have more control, reputation, ability, or knowledge; but the essence of what you're saying, I understand.

Influence needn't be an individual, rather a set of ideologies, somehow psychologically put into play. The psychology of human interaction, emotion and rationale can be used as a tool.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Does It matter?
Let`s get real - hacking is the only way to fight back at this time. The majority either believes the governments are the good guys, or they believe the governments are the necessary evil, at best. So, in real life, there`s nothing we could do.

Plus, with or without hacking, they will be constantly taking away our freedoms anyway (And yes, they will just make all the hackings themselves if they feel they need to). If that`s the case, that even if we lose, at least there will be some resistence. Just giving up and waiting doesn`t sound like a good idea and certainly won`t stop the rising fascism/NWO.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I share your opinion.
I believe that idea of Anonymous is part of CIA, because if someone track their work (at the begging when they was hot news) after attack of pentagon or NASA (cannot remember) US government change some laws, also open new offices for "war on cyber crimes" or something like that.
Good or bad thing behind name Anonymous is that that everyone can be Anonymous and do things behind that name.
And good point with:

You mess with classified information, and sure some citizens might get upset over the principle of the matter - but they'll move on with their life. People have short memories.

You mess with their money, though, and watch out. There's nothing a consumer society will condemn more than those who try to put the brakes on their consumerism. Can't buy gas? Can't play on e-bay? Can't Christmas shop? "It's those evil internet hackers, the anonymous ones. Damn that anonymity to hell." The people, and the government, soon will be seeking... no, DEMANDING, the END of internet anonymity.

old good "problem-reaction-solution"

Also, where is SOPA, CISPA in all this storys ?




off topic, also wiki leaks and Snowden are same project for me.
edit on 28-7-2013 by Yodaa because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-7-2013 by Yodaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Anonymous is private contractors working for Homeland Security. Yes every once in a while a person working for them screws up and does some thing stupid. Take for example Boris of Jaded Security who was supposed to test the voter database in different states. He was drunk and posted screen names and passwords even credit card information on Floridas Voter Database. And then his boss came down on him. He had a ethics complaint files with ISC2. He then burned his CISSP certificate an posted the picture online. Because he also held a UN certificate. See he is dual citizen of Israel. And he used the UN rulings on free and fair elections to over turn the complaint filed by the US. So he used the US policy of interfering in other countries elections against the US.




I made a thread on this but ATS deleted pretty much every thing.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And what happens to him? He ran to be elected to the board of directors for ISC2.

jadedsecurity.net...

So yes Anonymous is the government. Even TOR belongs to the government. TOR became a haven for pedos and so on so the State Department re did all of there relays. See that is how TOR belongs to the government. The Relays belong to them. Every thing you send over TOR goes to a US government computer and is relayed from it to by pass other countries restrictions on the internet. Now the government is using VPNs that they can assign a IP to a person and know exactly what that person was doing on that IP. Just like the new broadcast a live video feed on Twitter. You are looking at the US government helping protesters in other countries broadcast live.

http:///u2HjYqHJ

So you have our government allowing broadcast over twitter for protest? So do you think we can take advatage of that and protest the NSA spying world wide?
That is what happened with TOR people took advantage of it for another purpose.

From the auto edited link. Guess that trending paste bin is a NO No.



"Minimanual broadcast live" - ​​Unnamed "How about expanding the power of the demonstrations? Does not convey online? in - Create an account at twitter.com... and twitcasting.tv... b - Use a suggestive name for your account as "vemprarua_uf_cidade". c - Your cell phone camera and need access 3g or wifi d - Download and install "TwitCasting live (free)" (google play store) and - Once logged in, the application has a "record" button, and welcome to the live broadcast. Tips: I - Turn on the flash at night and in the shade II - Depending on your connection, change the form of recording (button "normal" app) III - Interact with viewers during transmission IV - Predict the transmission time, create an event in the face and tell us to disclose on pages and groups. V - Please let us know in advance about the broadcast schedule - do not miss with your audience. VI - At the end of transmission, always choose to record. Need help? Please contact one of the events in your city, do not know where you will be? www.facebook.com... Predict the transmission time, create an event in the face and tell us to disclose. Do not know this kind of work: See more in www.postv.org... Successfully created your event? Tell us your channel and broadcast events for: www.facebook.com... We will do our best to keep people updated on the manifests of the city. 'Minimanual the Ninja "
edit on 28-7-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
nice research!
Do you have any clue about TOR, i am suspicions too from his begging that is fake project.
I was research but didn`t find any thing about him.

p.s: ww9.u2hjyqhj... is invalid :/
edit on 28-7-2013 by Yodaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   
don`t need, i all connections find here:
www....__._/wiki/WikiLeaks:Tor

fowlchicago.wordpress.com...
www.networkworld.com...
cryptome.org...
edit on 28-7-2013 by Yodaa because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join