It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A New Threat To ATS has emerged

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Sometime we have to sacrifice things we like in order to receive the things we need.

What a dangerous statement

Sounds alot like "You have to sacrifice freedoms to receive security/safety.

Don't you see what is happening?
Controlled Opposition is in effect!




posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


With respect I'd say it's the other way around - we're aboloshing those who claim to act as security, for the greater aim of more freedom.

Just look at the very recent scandals regarding the alleged 'secure' firms. We're highlighting the breaches and lies, for the greater aim of securing freedom for the masses.

anonnews.org...

This news link will show you the activities in place of the likes of Turkey and such.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
I don't think it is against the terms of conditions to be a member of a submersive group. What is against the TOC, are any attempts to organize that group. It also against the TOC to discuss any illegal activity in which one participated. Thus I disagree that members of anon should be banned or the discussion of the group be banned. I do think anyone here that declares they are part of Anon are idiots and most likely are not. Then again, they could be the weak link which blows it all wide open.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


would just like to point out
that you need to change your signature
it still says e-terrorist.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I see where you are coming from, but that is not the case. Somehow now people think Anonymous, myself and other of free will are pawns in the grand scheme of things. The ends do not justify the means, the alleged controllers have nothing to gain. It is quite possible some agents infiltrated Anonymous and got some members to carry out exploits on certain servers sure. It was too easy, easy as cake. The security was too easy to breach, as #antisec stated. Possible? Bare in mind these servers did not have the best security one would expect given they are cheap to spend money on the most important things. this is not unlike corporate and governing bodies we have learned. However "The Plan" does not in any way work to the benefit of the PTB. Instead of judging Anonymous and going by mere suspicion why don't you do some research? Go to the sites and participate in the discussion and come back then tell me that we are pawns, militias, puppets to be had by big brother.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
I do think anyone here that declares they are part of Anon are idiots and most likely are not. Then again, they could be the weak link which blows it all wide open.


You do not understand what Anonymous means, and what Anonymous is about given your statement. If i say i am Anonymous I am in fact Anonymous about my identity. Anyone and everyone can be anonymous. there is no initiation no beat in no fee. If i say I am "part of a hacker team" that is entirely different. Anonymous is not a hacker group, Anonymous is activism . There is no membership. Anonymous does not officially exist as a group and that is the beauty of it. Anonymous is not the crips or the bloods, it is not a terrorist cell. Anonymous is people with ideas. Some people act on ideas and decide to hack and carry out all kinds of shenanigans. For i have repeated this so many times, people do your research please.
edit on 12-7-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
would just like to point out
that you need to change your signature
it still says e-terrorist.


oh ya
thx for the heads up



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
This seems to have gotten lost in the sauce... so because I can, I'm posting again...





Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I consider Anon to be e-terrorists, I do not like them because it's not non-violent protests, it is violent and costs businesses money and maybe even jobs and also they help deter liberties.

I consider those who operate under the banner of "Anonymous" who use a computer to uncover corporate and government malfeasance to be the equivalent (if not slightly more lazy equivalent) to the dumpster-diving activists who did the same, some years ago. But with a caveat -- those using illegal means to break into secure computer networks are criminals... but not "e-terrorists" where the term, terrorist, is a knee-jerk bogey-man exaggeration.

Wait... what? Seems like a contradiction.

Not really. Insecure computer networks and servers are everywhere. Guessing a directory structure of an unsecured folder on a server connected to the Internet is the equivalent to opening the lid of an unlocked dumpster. Using bruit-force password hacks and denial-of-service attacks are illegal.

One can argue till the face turns blue that the intentions of "Anonymous" are altruistic with the "greater good" in mind. And I don't doubt there are those who work under the Anonymous Flag that have altruism in mind. But their "announcements" are a bit too grandstanding, individuals pretending to be Anonymous using "we" as if it's some scary pronoun, the Guy Fawkes mask (someone with murderous intent), the videos, and all else amount come across as more attention-seeking than altruism.

Sorry... that's how I see it.

I hope good comes of their efforts. I hope society changes for the better. I hope the public awakens.

But I fear their efforts will backfire, and we all see some degree of change for the worst as a result.

This isn't a "threat to ATS," it's a threat to all if something goes wrong.
edit on 12-7-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   


Guessing a directory structure of an unsecured folder on a server connected to the Internet is the equivalent to opening the lid of an unlocked dumpster. Using bruit-force password hacks and denial-of-service attacks are illegal.


poor analogy?

rifling through a dumpster is generally illegal as well.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I am getting the feeling here that some assume I am a hacker? Because I support Anonymous, I am Anonymous I am a hacker by default or, I have engaged in illegal activities? Well a moron would be as so stupid to make such a claim. And a real hacker would know better, I am not even running proxy right now for i have nothing to hide. I will state i have protested in person the Westboro Baptist Church "this is not bragging" as a example of what I stand for. If i change my avatar to a furry woodland creature like a bunny or squirrel instead of my "menacing killer like" fawkes mask would people still assume i am a criminal.. a hacker? the banner of Anon has become a swastika is the eyes of some it seems. We are not to be feared we are to be embraced. Anonymous is the moral high ground.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

You do not understand what Anonymous means, and what Anonymous is about given your statement. If i say i am Anonymous I am in fact Anonymous about my identity. Anyone and everyone can be anonymous. there is no initiation no beat in no fee. If i say I am "part of a hacker team" that is entirely different. Anonymous is not a hacker group, Anonymous is activism. There is no membership. Anonymous does not officially exist as a group and that is the beauty of it. Anonymous is not the crips or the bloods, it is not a terrorist cell. Anonymous is people with ideas. Some people act on ideas and decide to hack and carry out all kinds of shenanigans. For i have repeated this so many times, people do your research please.
edit on 12-7-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)


I give you kudos for your explanation, as stars are not allowed.


I bolded certain parts of your explanation as this is one of the better descriptions of what Anonymous is supposed to strand for. Isn't it just as illogical to expect problems from Anonymous as it would be to expect problems from any supposed military(government) operatives. Reason being...neither side is dumb enough to blow their "covers" and leave their mistake for the world to see.

From the bolded parts of the above quote...one should see that apparently Anonymous is the movement towards the FREEDOM that We, the people are looking for. Is what Anon. does illegal??? Maybe yes, then again, maybe not, right now all they are doing is counting coup...it is a matter of perspective...and how far someone is willing to go to regain the freedoms that have been so covertly stripped from us for these so many years.

The side of right is the perspective from which one views it according to their beliefs and goals for themselves, their families, and their fellow human beings. 235 years ago, it was blood and guns...physicality that won our freedom from Mother England...235 years later this same war will be fought for the people...by the people...not with guns (hopefully, but if it must be, it will) but with stealth, and inside knowledge...remember the saying..."Keep your friends close...but your enemies even closer."



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Those cute little guy fawkes masks are not going to look so cute when somebody finally decides to throw a bomb from behind one.



posted on Jul, 12 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Anonymous By Association


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
I am getting the feeling here that some assume I am a hacker? Because I support Anonymous, I am Anonymous I am a hacker by default or, I have engaged in illegal activities?

I don't think so, and hope my previous post didn't give anyone the wrong idea.

ATSers express sympathy and support for all sorts of causes outside the "mainstream". As long as that doesn't involve recruitment, planning/confessing crimes or other activities prohibited by the terms & conditions, such expression is as valid as any other around here.

Publicly Anonymous


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
Well a moron would be as so stupid to make such a claim.

Most definitely. Self-incrimination is not generally associated with the luminaries of society, and certainly not the sort of trouble ATS needs to get caught up in.

Anonymous Identification


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
We are not to be feared we are to be embraced. Anonymous is the moral high ground.

While I do agree with some of the concepts associated with Anonymous, I don't agree with all of them, and strenuously disagree with some of them.

In particular, I disagree with the idea that a small, self-appointed group of individuals styling themselves an elite and attempting to force their ideologies on others through threats and intimidation is morally superior to the elites they claim to oppose. Of course my opinion wouldn't matter to them, because no amount of idealistic rhetoric changes the fact that they only pursue their own interests and beliefs.

As corrupt and unrepresentative as "the system" may be, it's still a better "system" than that. Anyone claiming to unilaterally represent "the people" is a liar and a charlatan, whether they wear an Armani suit or a Guy Fawkes mask. They sure as hell don't represent me.

The fact that I can expect to be viciously attacked simply for expressing such an opinion is proof enough of the hypocrisy underlying the charade.

Remember, Remember

But that's all moot, I suppose, in light of the realities that condemn the stated objectives of the Anonymous movement to certain failure.

How can I be so confident of that? The fatal flaw in Anonymous is what is cited as its greatest strength: anonymity.

The problem with anonymity is lack of accountability. Anyone can do whatever they want behind the mask of Anonymous. Anyone. It's a brand that can be soiled as easily as it can be polished. That "anyone" can include enemies of the cause as easily as zealous devotees.

That's basically what the whole COINTELPRO and Militia Movement business was about. Self-identified opposition that could be easily monitored and controlled by government. They didn't even need to go looking for "troublemakers" or "enemies of the state". Who needs to when they literally jump into the boat like so many naive, credulous fish?

And there you have my greatest protestation of the "movement". No matter how earnest or well-intentioned it may once have been, it is already corrupted beyond repair.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if most of what is currently attributed to "Anonymous" is actually being perpetrated by governments themselves, and that they are using the appeal of "joining Anonymous" to lure, surveil, tempt into criminal activity and ultimately imprison as "examples" young idealists who otherwise just want to "fight the system".

In Name Only

Which is why I urge anyone who actually believes in acting on the principles espoused by "Anonymous" to never, ever, ever associate themselves in any way, shape or form with that word. It's a trap.

If you believe in it, great. If you act on it, please do so with, if not respect for the law, respect for other human beings who have done you no harm. Doing evil in the name of good is the stock in trade of all the worst villains of history.

Effecting political change through genuine democratic means is a slow, tedious, expensive and often frustrating process. It really sucks, it has always been shockingly corrupt, and it's not surprising that so many people become discouraged by it and look for quick alternatives.

But as bad as it is, rejecting it in favor of ill-conceived, ad hoc depotism is still worse.

That's my opinion. I will stand with those who will protect my right to express it, and against anyone who would try to take it away, whatever they might call themselves.

Signed,

Pseudonymous










edit on 7/13/2011 by Majic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I'm still wondering how hacking into, and compromising the information of, playstation network members is "fighting the good fight" or "standing up for internet freedom"

Are you all that thick that you've missed it completely?

Maybe I'm special to have figured it out. I doubt that. But it's quite clear, through the actions of "anonymous" they are laying the groundwork for the freedom destroying laws they are so against. Can't you supporters see this? Can't you see that, at best, these guys are misguided and playing into TPTB's hands, and at worst, are actually part of the plan?

See, what they've done is take a whole generation of computer savvy kids and young adults, sprinkled in a few old school hackers, and have taken a stand. They claim to be against censorship and government/corporate corruption. So basically they've created a neat little box TPTB can place anyone who believes in the internet as free into.

Then they go beyond that. And start breaking laws, hacking sites. Oh, not the funny old deface hacks I remember, no the only way to protect the little people from TPTB is to compromise their account and release their info, including credit card info, into the wild.

So lets look at this from TPTB's perspective.

JoeBlow internet user thinks the internet should remain free and open and neutral.
Anonymous believes that.
Anonymous is a bunch of greedy hackers breaking laws
JoeBlow probably supports this, as he supports anonymous
If we leave an open internet, all the JoeBlows will team up and do bad things.

Anon = the laws they are against. they are the 911 for the internet patriot act.

I don't care what their manifesto says, if you understand anything of how this group operates, you'd know it's all smoke and mirrors.

Just as anti child porn laws are being used to stifle file sharing, legit or otherwise, the actions of groups like anonymous will be used to restrict ALL of our freedoms.


edit on 13-7-2011 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   
I have been around for awhile. I lurked ATS for a few years before joining. I did the same at another forum, too I just didn't want to talk online at first, until around 2007 (formerly i only absorbed information, not sharing it).

All the talk of Anon and everything aside, the threat that they are supposed to represent to freedom is already here. In the early days of the internet, it was the wild west. Kind of like the first time I ever did Free for All on Grand Theft Auto IV on XBox Live. It was utter madness and mayhem. People were doing really cool stuff for no other reason than to do really cool stuff.

Over the years, we have seen 2 methods used. At first, it was pure disinformation/discrediting. The information that was getting out was drowned out in a sea of meaningless babble and outright lies placed there by lord knows who (wink, wink).

But a more recent method we have seen is the outright choking of any information coming out. Of course, the noise continues, drowning out any real discovery. And ATS is a perfect microcosm of that (more on that in a moment). But on top of the disinfo/misinfo being strewn about, we are also seeing just less information all around.

I would suspect that what happened to media is happening online. There is still small public channels broadcast in larger cities, but not in smaller ones. They have a small audience. The big audience is with the major networks. I think the same is happening on the internet. Thus, information is controlled.

Just look at ATS. You constantly see people whine about how "that is not a reputable source". Isn't that the whole point of the internet? To not develop the hierarchy of what is perceived as reputable and disreputable, or worthy and unworthy? It is supposed to be a theoretical free for all, where the user must beware ("let the buyer beware").

And if you look at ATS recent posts, it is very hard to find something worthy of discussion anymore. It is all regurgitation of mainstream media sources. The very same crap that I come online to get away from. Not that I am blaming TheAboveNetwork, LLC. This is a user generated site. So we either have sock puppets from MSM promoting their crap on here, or we have a display of stupidity from the sheeple, constantly going back to their own vomit for another bite.

I will let the reader decide. Regardless, this may not be a threat to ATS in particular. But to the internet..youbetcha.



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
WHAT the HECK is going on with folks on ATS wanting to BAN everything today?? First the leader of ATS suggests banning Huffington Post, now the OP here wants to ban the Anon fellas. WHATS NEXT, should be BAN WOMEN HERE??

Is this ATS still????????



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
The motto here is deny ignorance,
I believe there is some fear being generated due to a misunderstanding caused by an ignorance as to what anon is, whom anon is.
I firmly believe what I just wrote.



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Any teen/wannabee superhero/nutjob/do gooder/script kiddie/"hacktivist" with delusions of grandeur can indulge in their fantasy of being part of 'anonymous', start a post with any kind of rubbish in it, put the "we are legion blah blah blah" crap in it.

Chances are most of them haven't seen 4chan, wouldn't know anonymous if it slapped them across the backside with a banjo and their idea of hacking is trying to guess someones WOW account password.

The problem comes when they start linking to blogs/other boards/sites etc that claim to be "anonymous", and that's what we've seen recently - efforts at some form of recruitment where people want our members to join their new superhero squad as it attempts to do x,y and z.

And its only gonna get worse now the kids are out of school, because its "cool" to claim to be anonymous

We had a position on the "real" Anonymous (vanilla Anon, with a capital A, the real deal I think) a long time ago when they took on the scientology cult, which was that we respected their right to exist, but asked them to respect our T&C's which clearly state that recruitment of our members is not allowed

As I recall that seemed to work pretty well.

Its not Anonymous (Captial "A") that provides a problem. They seemed to be a group of genuinely concerned activists with somewhat noble intent and direction.

anonymous (Small "a"), on the other hand, is libel to get all of us free thinking spirits condemned as cyber terrorists. I'll miss WOW when I'm in the cyber version of Guantanamo Bay...



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join