There is much current and rather pointless debate about the race of mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa fighting for the Gaddafi regime.
The point is, if the cash is cut-off these people will go home.
Why can Anonymous not cut the cash off for Robert Mugabe and Gaddafi?
What's the problem?
They already have targeted sanctions.
Just trying to distance myself a bit - but are these the new leaders of morality and so forth for the planet?
What ideology do they follow?
Is it hit-and-miss based on personal preference?
Who is a dictator?
Who is not a legitimate target?
What is their paradigm?
I would say anybody who tries to control the masses and hides behind a curtain shall have the curtains fall to leave them exposed to masses. And what
a show it will be when there on stage nude and showing all for all to see.
because annonymous can't actually have a war with people in the real world?
Pay pal shuts off service to someone, annonymous hacks their server. That's the MO of annonymous, not stopping third world dictators financed by
western weapon technology. How would annonymous even accomplish this feat? Send a hack to their bank account? Okay they still have AK-47's and
That and one of the first things most of them do when there is a whiff of trouble is cut off the net in the country in question. Since they take
away the internet themselves it doesn't leave a lot for anon to attack.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.