Anonymous: Defenders of Truth, Justice, and... oh wait

Originally posted by SFA437


You whine about pedophiles yet do not see harm in an 11 year old girl exposing her breasts, talking about being f****ed until she bleeds and rubbing her crotch through her panties on webcam.... You do know that supporting that behavior IS pedophilia don't you? If you see nothing wrong with the girl's behavior then I do see your issue with 4chan and Anonymous attempting to convince her to stay offline- you WANT her to be flashing her boobs and whatnot. Only a pedophile would see no harm in what she was doing.

See this is what I mean when I say "grossly misinformed".

They weren't harrassing her to make her stop. They were harrassing her because she wouldn't do more.

And seriously, to you and everyone else who's done it, stop with the name calling. It doesn't help with the discussion by saying "Derple derps, you're a pedo. Haha, argument wonz, troll". It only takes away from it

How long have you been waiting in the background to launch an attack on a group that is at least trying to fight back against those that would suppress not only a Nation but the entire World?

Pedophiles? Criminals? Wow!

Do you guys not even try to use facts anymore? (Whoever you work for) Or has it become so easy to sway the masses with only false accusations and slander with no actual proof?

Gotta try harder...it ain't working.

Originally posted by MrSensible

Originally posted by SFA437


You whine about pedophiles yet do not see harm in an 11 year old girl exposing her breasts, talking about being f****ed until she bleeds and rubbing her crotch through her panties on webcam.... You do know that supporting that behavior IS pedophilia don't you? If you see nothing wrong with the girl's behavior then I do see your issue with 4chan and Anonymous attempting to convince her to stay offline- you WANT her to be flashing her boobs and whatnot. Only a pedophile would see no harm in what she was doing.

See this is what I mean when I say "grossly misinformed".

They weren't harrassing her to make her stop. They were harrassing her because she wouldn't do more.

And seriously, to you and everyone else who's done it, stop with the name calling. It doesn't help with the discussion by saying "Derple derps, you're a pedo. Haha, argument wonz, troll". It only takes away from it

Just wandering what is the source of this info?

Originally posted by MrSensible
They weren't harrassing her to make her stop. They were harrassing her because she wouldn't do more.

That is SO far off base it is INSANE!

All of this didn't even start in /b/ but in Stickydrama with a post about about Dahvie from Blood on the Dance Floor having a pedophilic relationship with Jessi Slaughter. Fail #1

Jessi posted all of her suggestive photos and videos on Tumblr, MySpace and YouTube months before attracting the attention of 4chan members. Fail #2

There were no death threats made according to the Marion County Sheriff's Office which handled the child pornography aspect of the case as well as the subsequent harassment. Fail #3

4chan users originally alerted Jessi's parents as to their daughters behavior after which Jessi taunted various 4chan members and /b/tards. THEN the harassment started. Fail #4

The drama was by /b/tards NOT by Anonymous. /b/tards are not all Anon and vice versa. Fail #5

Jessi was a troll, knew what she was doing, and got trolled back harder. The crying was a bunch of BS anyway as she was back online camwhoring with a few months. Fail #6

Now since ALL of this is easily verified with a quick Google search or speaking to 4chan members who were around at the time it's easily found to be true. Show me one post from someone from Anonymous who wished Jessi to go further (kind of hard since she posted naked photos to Tumblr but whatever).

That's right.... you can't. Final Fail.

reply to post by MrSensible

What a ridiculous statement. I don't need a bunch of pedophiles standing up for my rights. I can do just fine on my own.

*applause* Thank you for informing me about the under belly of this organization..

s&f's for you.

reply to post by MrSensible

reply to post by Youmakemewonder


OP and friend, your complicit endorsement of CP is disturbing, very disturbing.

Your use of the lingo does suggest you yourself are familiar with the site.

So you do realize that a person that does not wish to register on 4Chan is automatically given the name Anonymous, that is not to say that all Anonymous users are Anonymous.

That logic would suggest that since members of the KKK are white that all white people are KKK, and as we all know that simply is not true.

Have members of Anonymous done things that some people would find to be less than morale or legal, certainly, but this is why:

Anonymous is very much a representation of the world population without the screw you over and rule your bum types.

They are your neighbors, your friends, your enemies, your coworkers, your maids, your hotel staff, your mailman, your lawyers, your security guards, your grocery store clerks, your car mechanics, your IT professionals, your community organizers, your cable TV techs, your delivery drivers, your architects, etc, etc....

So out of such a diverse and encompassing group are their people with less than legal motives, sure, how could there not be, criminals exist so they exist within Anonymous as well, does that make the entire collective criminal, nope, why not?

Does America commit crimes against other countries, yep, so does that make all Americans criminal, nope, do you get the concept yet?

Did the poor little Jessi find herself the target of an official Operation? Nope, so to paint that it was as such is patently false.

Is Operation SafeKids an official Operation against a particular site that distributes CP, YES!

The actions of the few do not speak to the actions of the many, you as a citizen of a country and being of a specific ethnicity do understand that, to pretend otherwise is just simply deluding yourself.

Who gives them the right to speak for you?

They don't obviously, what Anonymous chooses as a collective is what they have chosen to do, if you feel like your input is sorely missed, nobody said that you don't have the right to join the collective and express your views.

Which brings me to the last point, what are these constant DDos attacks actually accomplishing?

Simple, it mainly brings attention to the target, so that people ask why did they target them?

It is a benign way to shine a light on a particular corporation/organisation/or person, the more serious transgressors find themselves targets of more serious methods, not an endorsement of those tactics just simply how it works.

The continued misrepresentation of Anonymous as script kiddies and hackers, is also disturbing, you sir as I stated above due to your use of lingo, seem to have been through that site from whence the group was born, so you are now some super hacker? I was not aware that was a requirement to post on that site.

Agree or disagree with them, that is your right, but that does not change that they will continue to take a stand for what they find to be wrong or corrupt in the world today.

ETA: Have a Happy 4th, celebrate your Independence. Don't hate, Celebrate!


reply to post by gabby2011

Thank you for informing me about the under belly of this organization..

You weren't you were misled..

Originally posted by Hijaqd
reply to post by MrSensible

 

reply to post by Youmakemewonder

 

That logic would suggest that since members of the KKK are white that all white people are KKK, and as we all know that simply is not true.

Not questioning what the logic would suggest, but because some whites were kkk, others were involved in various racist groups, and some were/are just racist that committed horrendous acts all of white people were/are dishonored and degraded by them. In fact a common stereotype of white people are that they are racist.

Anonymous is very much a representation of the world population without the screw you over and rule your bum types.

No Anonymous doesn't exclude anyone. While the screw you over and rule your bum types probably aren't attracted to the over all theme doesn't mean there aren't any involved.

So out of such a diverse and encompassing group are their people with less than legal motives, sure, how could there not be, criminals exist so they exist within Anonymous as well, does that make the entire collective criminal, nope, why not?

Does America commit crimes against other countries, yep, so does that make all Americans criminal, nope, do you get the concept yet?

I don't personally recognize world law, but yes America has committed immoral, disgusting, and terrible acts. This of course, doesn't mean all Americans are guilty, but it most certainly brings America's morality as a whole into question. Likewise, even though many people of anonymous may be good intentioned freedom fighters those who commit crimes whilst being anonymous make anonymous commit crimes.

The actions of the few do not speak to the actions of the many, you as a citizen of a country and being of a specific ethnicity do understand that, to pretend otherwise is just simply deluding yourself.

..

edit on 4-7-2011 by Hijaqd because: (no reason given)

But they are legion....the few are the many.

Look I don't know too much about anonymous or their history, but from what I have seen they have some good ideas mixed with questionable actions. The whole "we are anonymous anyone can be apart of us" is a bit counterproductive, cowardly, and a bit retarded. This is just my opinion of course, but to make a difference such a group should be out in the open while somehow regulating the actions of its members with morals and have clearly defined goals to at least its own members.

reply to post by Ariess


Good post aside from you dont think everyone should aloud to be anonymous care to elaborate.
Btw the reason they remain anonymous is because everything they do is 'illegal' and until anonymous becomes so big the government couldn't stop it they have to remain anonymous or all the members would simply be jailed.

Originally posted by mb2591
reply to post by Ariess

 

Good post aside from you dont think everyone should aloud to be anonymous care to elaborate.
Btw the reason they remain anonymous is because everything they do is 'illegal' and until anonymous becomes so big the government couldn't stop it they have to remain anonymous or all the members would simply be jailed.

edit on 4-7-2011 by mb2591 because: (no reason given)

Everyone on here is anonymous unless they have posted their personal info for the world to see along with a scanned copy of their passport or government issued ID for verification. Since we are all anonymous here that somehow means we are all doing something illegal? Just kidding

Here's some good work done by Anonymous:

Chris Forcand

reply to post by Ariess

I don't personally recognize world law, but yes America has committed immoral, disgusting, and terrible acts. This of course, doesn't mean all Americans are guilty, but it most certainly brings America's morality as a whole into question. Likewise, even though many people of anonymous may be good intentioned freedom fighters those who commit crimes whilst being anonymous make anonymous commit crimes.

Fair enough, perhaps put a different way then?

In America (any country actually) exists rapists and murderers, the actions of those individuals do not represent the actions of the rest of the citizens of the country, I am not a criminal simply because criminals exist within my country's midst.

It is the stereotype that I intended to address, I choose not to silently accept a stereotype, by doing so I feel it is a complicit endorsement to the stereotype. I am not defined by what someone else thinks of me based on my appearance or ancestral background, I am defined by my own thoughts and actions not a stereotype.

But they are legion....the few are the many.

Anonymous is Legion, for the many make up the One.

Look I don't know too much about anonymous or their history

Exactly why some are trying to explain, to dispel misconceptions and outright lies.

but from what I have seen they have some good ideas mixed with questionable actions

I cannot speak to how you have perceived things, but I can ask that you consider the source, MSM for example has a highly nasty habit of sensationalizing things in order to garner viewers to specifically raise their ratings and as a result their advertising income.

This is just my opinion of course

And I respect your opinion and do not feel it necessary to coerce it any way shape or form, I only wished to address the misrepresentations and slander, to counter-point so that one may have a more complete picture on which to base their opinion on.

to make a difference such a group should be out in the open

Anonymous as a whole is out in the open, I know you infer to the Anonymous moniker and the masks though.

To that I would say, I am sure they wish for the time when that could be done without having to fear reprisal or retaliation, and there are members that do protest without masks so that time may be sooner rather than later.

Originally posted by Hijaqd


Did the poor little Jessi find herself the target of an official Operation? Nope, so to paint that it was as such is patently false.

Fair enough. But to ignore it and pretend it didn't happen is idiotic. Was it sponsored by AnonOps? I couldn't find anything supporting that it was. However, these same people that were responsible are likely still members of the group in some way.

They don't obviously, what Anonymous chooses as a collective is what they have chosen to do, if you feel like your input is sorely missed, nobody said that you don't have the right to join the collective and express your views.

It is not that I feel my views are not being expressed. This is a misunderstanding. My point is only this: people are putting too much faith in a group that is extremely, for lack of a better word, shady.

Agree or disagree with them, that is your right, but that does not change that they will continue to take a stand for what they find to be wrong or corrupt in the world today.

No one is here to change the group, the only way to do that would be through law enforcement. I'm simply here to spread the truth about an organization that does not have people's best interest at hearts, though they are always saying they do.

Here are some more examples of Anonymous having your "best interest at heart". Remember, they're the voice of the people now, supposedly. Too bad they're using that voice to:

Steal people's business emails.
Source

Steal people's private emails.
Source
For the record: I hate Sarah Palin. I think she's the worst person currently alive besides ex-Fuhrer Bush. But I still respect her right to privacy.

This one is great because it also says this:

"The same fate will meet anyone else who tries to paint us as terrorists in an Orwellian attempt to pass more pro-censorship or racial-profiling police state laws," a statement from the group threatens.

So basically anyone who disagrees with them will be harrassed. Sounds like a very fair, righteous, and stoic group of individuals.




Let me say this, no one in the world thinks religion is a detriment to society more than I do. BUT, I recognize and respect their right to practice whatever made-up shenanigans they want to.

This group is sh*tting all over people's basic rights everywhere you look and calling it fair play. It is internet terrorism

Originally posted by MrSensible
Fair enough. But to ignore it and pretend it didn't happen is idiotic. Was it sponsored by AnonOps? I couldn't find anything supporting that it was. However, these same people that were responsible are likely still members of the group in some way.

Seriously? Seriously?

You are saying "There isn't a single shred of evidence anywhere on the net that the Jessi Slaughter incident was sponsored by Anonymous but they were responsible for it anyway".

Weren't you the one demanding "proof" and "links" earlier in this thread? Now you won't even adhere to your own standards that you demand of others

You have accused Anonymous of requesting she expose herself. You lied.
You said the incident was organized by AnonOps. You lied.
You said the incident started because Jessi was too modest and would not remove her clothing. You lied.

Nobody is saying it did not happen. Matter of fact you were given a $%*%@ TIMELINE of the event. A very detailed one at that. You KNOW that Jessi was not exposing herself on /b/ but on a completely different site run by a pornographer. You KNOW that this was instigated and run by /b/tards. You KNOW that AnonOps notified her parents of her actions and why her internet access should be removed. You KNOW AnonOps notified her parents of the possible pedophilic relationship between Jessi and Dahvie. You KNOW that Jessi's tears were false as she was back being a camwhore 6 weeks after the "Consequences" video.

You have been PROVEN wrong over and over again yet still you persist. Why?

Originally posted by SFA437
You are saying "There isn't a single shred of evidence anywhere on the net that the Jessi Slaughter incident was sponsored by Anonymous but they were responsible for it anyway".

The drama was by /b/tards NOT by Anonymous. /b/tards are not all Anon and vice versa

Kay, so we have established that some were involved. Glad we agree.

Weren't you the one demanding "proof" and "links" earlier in this thread?

No I wasn't.

You have accused Anonymous of requesting she expose herself. You lied.
You said the incident was organized by AnonOps. You lied.
You said the incident started because Jessi was too modest and would not remove her clothing. You lied.

Nobody is saying it did not happen. Matter of fact you were given a $%*%@ TIMELINE of the event. A very detailed one at that.

You KNOW that Jessi was not exposing herself on /b/ but on a completely different site run by a pornographer. You KNOW that this was instigated and run by /b/tards.

All of this information can be found in the link in my FIRST POST. Which you might want to read at some point.

You KNOW that AnonOps notified her parents of her actions and why her internet access should be removed.

They sure did. The part you forgot was where they threatened to kill her.

You have been PROVEN wrong over and over again yet still you persist.

I think in your head you're much more persuasive than you actually are.

Please consider actually reading some of the things I wrote and visiting some of the sources. You may learn something.

Originally posted by MrSensible
Kay, so we have established that some were involved. Glad we agree.

In trolling her yes. In requesting she get naked no.

Originally posted by MrSensible

Originally posted by SFA437
Weren't you the one demanding "proof" and "links" earlier in this thread?

No I wasn't.

Sorry that was Youmakemewonder. My bad.

Originally posted by MrSensible
All of this information can be found in the link in my FIRST POST. Which you might want to read at some point.

I did which is why I am going to enjoy this SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much!

Originally posted by MrSensible
The part you forgot was where they threatened to kill her.

The very link you state is 100% accurate and proof positive that Anonymous was behind this disproves your own assertion

Here is YOUR link: knowyourmeme.com...

Now here is a quote from that very link which you refer to in order to prove your case:

Know Your Meme
Several hours later, Gawker updated their article to note that a spokeswoman from the Marion County, Florida sheriff’s department stated that, while there is a current investigation involving an eleven year old girl, they are looking into the existence of pornographic pictures of her and the prank calls referencing them. The spokeswoman was also quoted as saying “There have been no death threats or threats of harm in any way.”

Originally posted by MrSensible
Please consider actually reading some of the things I wrote and visiting some of the sources.

I did. This is where I finally found a solid reference that Anonymous did NOT threaten to kill Jessi and no death threats had ever been made. THANK YOU! It is always nice when someone else inadvertently proves your point for you.

Originally posted by MrSensible
You may learn something.

I did- see above. Thanks again- you saved me a TON of time on /b/ and Gawker trying to find old cached pages.

Originally posted by MrSensible
I think in your head you're much more persuasive than you actually are.

Actually YOU have been the persuasive one here. Granted you've persuaded people to my side of the debate by posting and referring to a link that categorically states Jessi was not subject to death threats, that the drama started on StickyDrama not with Anonymous and that it was 4chan's /b/tards who engaged in harassment whereas Anonymous simply found and passed along open source info and called her "ugly" and "stupid".

People keep bandying the phrase "internet terrorism" when it comes down to Anonymous, but I have yet to see anything "terror-like" about them.

Let's look at the definition of "terrorism" in the Oxford Dictionary of English:

terrorism
Pronunciation: /ˈtɛrərɪzəm/
noun
[mass noun]
the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

So, what is this "terrorism"?
I have seen them shut down websites, I have seen them hack twitter feeds, I have seen them call out TPTB for their corruption and encourage people to question their actions, but I haven't yet seen any violence from them, and those intimidated by them are mostly misinformed by ridiculous labels such as "internet terrorists" or "hackers on steroids".

Or does keeping people from their PS3 accounts constitute as terrorism these days? If so, then it's a pretty sad world we live in.

And to all those who are honestly intimidated by Anonymous, my advice to them is to buy a dog.

reply to post by The Empty Skies



You and I must have different dictionaries.

Source

systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Things often have multiple definitions

Originally posted by MrSensible
reply to post by The Empty Skies

 

You and I must have different dictionaries.

Source

systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Things often have multiple definitions

Please not the presence of the word "and" which in English means that two (or more) set criteria need to be present to meet the definition being given.

In this case it is violence and intimidation. Since Anonymous has not used violence, by your posted definition they cannot be terrorists.

I will say that they are capable of juvenile and bullying behavior on occasion however this is not terrorism.

reply to post by MrSensible


Well yes, dictionaries often cite different definitions. You used Dictionary.com's definition and I used OxfordDictionary.com's definiton.

I'd also like to add that the Oxford Dictionary is much older and much more reliable than Dictionary.com, but you're right, these things often do have multiple defintions.

Another definition I've read is simply "to inflict terror", to which I ask: where's the terror?

Blimey, if Anonymous' actions make them terrorists, I wonder what that makes some of the governments around the world!

Originally posted by The Empty Skies
Blimey, if Anonymous' actions make them terrorists, I wonder what that makes some of the governments around the world!

I think you make an interesting point here. And yes, I think by either of our definitions, many governments fit into the terrorist category.

So then the question becomes, do you fight terrorists with more terrorists? I hate to think that's the only choice we have.