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.

 

NATO: Anonymous will be "infiltrated" and "persecuted"

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

NATO: Anonymous will be "infiltrated" and "persecuted"


arstechnica.com

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization contains the combined military might of 28 member countries, including Germany, the United Kingdom, and France. All three of those nations, and the United States, possess huge armies, nuclear weapons, and are committed to Article Five of NATO's charter:
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked.


An alliance implies that the signatories are in fact, for the purposes of the alliance (in this case 'security') they are one entity. yet each nation holds its own information as classified and subject to compartmentalization to restrict its distribution.


"In this Information Age, the North Atlantic Alliance faces a dilemma of how to maintain cohesion in the environment where sharing information with Allies increases information security risks," NATO's Information and National Security survey observes, "but where withholding it undermines the relevance and capabilities of the Alliance."


clearly this is true. there is a fine line between protecting yourself and cutting off your nose to spite your face.

After the 9/11 attack, it was clear that agencies had to open up to one another like never before... which was the ostensible reason for the overarching DHS to be created... yet as a result....


It "resulted in an exponential number of people obtaining access to classified information." Over 850,000 functionaries now enjoy some kind of "top-secret" security status, he claims. Many have access to the DoD's Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet), dispenser of embassy cables.

The study cites critics of SIPRNet who say that it lacks the ability to detect unauthorized access. "Thus, those in charge of the network design relied on those who had access to this sensitive data to protect it from abuse. These users were never scrutinized by any state agency responsible for the data-sharing system."


- Think Bradley Manning....

850,000 Top Secret clearances... there's a crazy notion... that many people have access... and we must wonder now.. how many of those 850,000 are members of (or sympathetic to "Anonymous"?


The author seems confident, however, that the notorious group's days are numbered. "It remains to be seen how much time Anonymous has for pursuing such paths," Jopling writes. "The longer these attacks persist the more likely countermeasures will be developed, implemented, the groups will be infiltrated and perpetrators persecuted."


I suspect, as many do, that Anonymous and it's shenanigans are not exactly without some level of 'official' support. Time will tell.

I do find it terribly transparent that the largest aggravation that anonymous is said to have caused is against the commercial world and mostly, it's financial and security contracting exploits.


A big chunk of the assessment is devoted to the activities of Anonymous, most notably its denial-of-service attacks against PayPal, MasterCard, Visa, and Amazon.com for shutting down financial and server space services to WikiLeaks. Next comes the Anonymous assault on HBGary Federal, which had been planning some methods to take down WikiLeaks and expose Anonymous. It didn't turn out that way, of course. Instead, Anonymous penetrated the security company, erasing data, publishing e-mails, and wrecking its website.


We shall see whether the transparency of their motivations will become clearer but as long as they offend enemies of NATO... they apparently had no problem with it...

By the way, in case you were wondering.. here is a link to the NATO membership list.... www.nato.int...





arstechnica.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Well Bin Laden is dead, we're openly helping Al-Queda and say we're about to begin talks with the Taliban..

Obviously we need a new Boogey Man to fight....
What better than an Anonymous Boogey Man ??

That's gotta be worth Billions to fight and freedoms MUST be taken to ensure..ummm..our freedom..


S&F Like we didn't see it coming..



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Well, if this happens I would imagine that there would be lots of protests. Anonymous isn't a bad group they are fighting for the people. And if anyone tells you otherwise, they are spreading dis-info and are trying to get you against anonymous. Yes there may be some less then credible sub-sectors of anonymous, but overall they are good.
Take Lulzsec for example, most of the stuff they do is "comical" IE the fake Tupac article. But anonymous does good things IE anonymous Iran, and fighting against internet censorship, and called out NATO on their war crimes.
--------------------------------------------
You know what I find funny about all this # , NATO blames anonymous for doing bad things, yet they bomb the living # out of people. Anonymous is "harmless" in the sense that they won't kill people, they just hack things, they don't take away others people lives.
--------------------------------------------
If NATO does try and do anything, I say we should organize protests. This would be an attrocity if it did happen.
NATO is a war/killing machine. They are flaunting their power, and think they are hot #. NATO may have been good back in the day during the cold war WHEN it was needed. But now, gtfo NATO.
edit on 10-6-2011 by thedeadwalkk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Anonymous is just a CIA front to regulate our freedom on the internet. It is part of the CIA's plan to create a problem so the government can react against it. Dam the CIA. Dam NATO too, for supporting illegal wars.


edit on 10-6-2011 by MIDNIGHTSUN because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


You cannot infiltrate and persecute an idea.

This is the folly of all authoritarian governments, and points to what NATO is becoming.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 


You really believe that?
Well thats OK, feel free to believe what ever floats your boat.
Anonymous is good, your being sucked into the whirling tornado of dis-info.
Get out while you can!
( serious )



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
IMO, we are not getting the whole
pic.

Anonymous has already been infiltrated
and lots of them turned as assets for the
FBI or act as informants.

What this objective is, to further infiltrate
to root out spies and enemies not associated
or friendly to NATO.

In other words, they are looking for Chinese,
Russian, Middle East spies who have already
infiltrated Anonymous.

Anonymous seems to be an entity that
many countries want to manipulate for
personal agendas including National
Security espionage. The cyber spies
of tomorrow.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 





Anonymous is just a CIA front to regulate our freedom on the internet. It is part of the CIA's plan to create a problem so the government can react against it. Dam the CIA. Dam NATO too, for supporting illegal wars.


You are not the first to say this but no one ever offers proof even though I have asked numerous times. Do you have any proof of this? Do you think it is impossible for people to get together and be activists?

You cant just run around thinking that everything is the government, it will make you no better than the fear-driven sheeple. I have associate with Anon before and they are certainly not C.I.A (the ones I dealt with). That is a first hand account of Anon, which made them more credible in my eyes. Once you understand how anon works, you can see that no amount of infiltration will change them or what they do. There are no leaders to pay off and nothing is done without the "support" of the whole. I put support in quotations because it is not like a vote or anything, just an idea that spreads that seems favorable.

Decentralization is what makes anon so hard to understand.

I feel like if this were the 1960's people that say that the civil rights movement must be CIA. That is exactly what anon is growing, a second civil rights movement, but based on socioeconomic class, not race.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


If I remember correctly I've beat you to the punch by a few weeks on this post. I guess it doesn't matter. Gotta love the injustice of our world leaders.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Which anonymous will be infiltrated?

Good luck.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by drew1749
reply to post by Maxmars
 


If I remember correctly I've beat you to the punch by a few weeks on this post. I guess it doesn't matter. Gotta love the injustice of our world leaders.



You are absolutely correct! Please forgive me.. I did a search and I probably failed to notice the thread there because I thought it had been missed....

Please continue all your discussions on this topic in the original thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thread closed.
edit on 10-6-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join