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.

 

Did Anonymous make donations to charity using stolen credit card info?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveEquation

Originally posted by Jay-morris
I might be wrong but all the money that they took, will be given back to them by the bank. If someone stole the money out of my bank, and they knew it was stoken, then they would have to give me the money back.

If thats the case here, then no one will lose their money. Only the company would lose the money.
edit on 26-12-2011 by Jay-morris because: (no reason given)


Now the question that remains is:

where do the banks get the money to replace the money that was stolen from your account? Do they just login into your account and edit your credit balance like you can edit it in Excel document? Or do they get the money from the federal reserve bank?


Banks make huge profits every year. The huge profits outweigh the timess they get hacked. A major hack like this does not happen often, but with the money they make, this would not even dent their wealth




posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I remember reading somewhere a few weeks back about this coming .. Anonymous, or someone claiming the banner of Anonymous ( which that is always the case, since Anonymouse isn't a real GROUP but a loose collective ) .. They had said that the plan was to steal credit card data and donate to charities..

They elaborated by saying that the "victims" could then contact their financial institution to report their card stolen and would in turn not be liable to pay for the charges, and that the charities/non-profits would also not be responsible to return the donated funds.. the idea being that the banks themselves would have to finance the donations.

The goal being in short to steal from fatcat banks and give it to those in need..

I wish I could cite a source, it might very well have been somewhere on ATS .. but this was announced weeks ago for sure..

I've personally had my credit card stolen in the past and the person bought from a local place .. I never had to cover those funds and I know the store didn't have to pay any penalties either.. I have no clue if the thief was ever found.

What could the collateral be? that the banks write this off as a bad debt and that federal insurance ( tax money ) covers it? .. or what? I don't know enough about that portion to guess.. only that the victim isn't directly liable to pay for it, and the charities aren't either ( I believe ) .. so correct me if I'm wrong.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Apparantly they said its people impostering the group.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveEquation
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Yeah i agree with you about public listing of names. I don't know what that is all about especially for maintenance people. However, I like the fact that they are attacking the very aspect of our system that is sort of an Achilles heel. Our monetary system that is.


I feel so much better now. My card was one of the ones that was stolen. I hadn't realized I was one of the filthy rich; I just thought I had an intense interest in the subjects Strafor covers and wished to stay informed. It looks like I may have escaped harm by jumping on this as soon as I heard about it. I hope anon, or whomever, will stick with coroporate cards to fuel their 'donations.' The clean up for this will cost millions, I suspect, and it won't be just out of the pockets of big banks. It is one Royal Pain for individuals to fix.

I cancelled my card and will undergo the hassle of changing a lot of things around. It really angers me that Stratfor was so foolish as to make this stuff vulnerable. Of course, I am somewhat at fault for allowing them to store my card. That's not a mistake I will make again. My guess is Stratfor is going to suffer a bit of a backlash from its customers. If its site would come back online I'd sure send them a nasty email or two. It looks to me as if their IT department was not following best practices. Of course, same thing happened to ATS a few years ago. Springer sprung (ouch!) for the bucks to hire professional security to fix the problem, which is how Springer became one of the owners of ATS.

I agree with some of the sentiments here about charities. The head of the Red Cross makes over $400K per year--clearly he's part of the 1%. Local charities are best. You can see where the money goes.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
the fact that is stolen means that it can be reported and the individuals who had the loss can get their money back...does it make it right? not in the least bit....BUT something good came from the theft which is something that is not usually found with a theft. these people can get their money back. hell if it doesn't really matter that much to the people they can write it off on their taxes...



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 

i am sorry that happened to you. i hope everything goes well with recovering your funds.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


How does it bite you in the backside??????? did they get your credit card number?????



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I don't see the problem with this, I mean I do but this isn't that big of a deal.


Does anyone know what the largest amount stole from an individual person was? What if they were taking like 20 bucks? What if they also knew full well it would be linked back to them?

If I got hacked and had a small amount of money taken from me and given to charity I would not bother to get it back. I would just accept it as a gracious act on my own part and let them keep the money. But would I have donated that 20 dollars on my own? Doubt it. Yes I know at time like this 20 dollars can go a long way and thats why I wouldn't donate 20 dollars on my own, but a little push and I would cause I know I can get by with a bit less.

Now if I'm losing hundreds of dollars? Okay thats not cool and I'm going to be pissed.

The fact is they could have done something extremely selfish but instead did something good.

Robin Hood is a criminal, but its the thought behind the crime that separates him from the common thief.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Aw, those poor corporations have lost a few $'s, lets all feel sorry for them


Good on anon, while corporate monsters continue their rampage across the globe, robbing the people, polluting the planet and making millions of people destitute one group of people has the balls to fight back!

You guys keep shopping at Walmart and pretend you're noble for recycling, I'll continue to express support for the people actually taking action against the extraction of wealth and resources on an industrial scale.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


Stealing from the rich to give to the poor.. I see the romantic robin hood mentality behind it. Stealing is still wrong.. but if you're trying to do good I can at least understand where you're coming from.

However they didn't steal from the rich and give to the poor did they? No .. they stole from average everyday Americans, the vast majority of which were middle income and lower income folks. I don't see how that could be cheered on, regardless of who they donated to.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   
I for one would find this pretty hilarious if true.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
this is their robin hood:

1. they steal granny's money (that her husband worked his whole life to provide for her when he passed away), and give it to some organization meant to help starving 3rd world countries, most of which is eaten up in operation costs, the rest is stolen by drug lords at gunpoint

2. then when granny's also about to die from starvation, someone swoops in and gives her a box of bran flakes, and expect her to be grateful that they gave her back 1/1,000,000,000,000th of the money they stole from her in the first place. oh robin hooood to the rescue. my hubby says thanks from his grave.

this is how it works in the third world. problem is, the propaganda-war machine already made sure the world hates us, so granny won't be getting any charitable donations from overseas.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


Stealing from the rich to give to the poor.. I see the romantic robin hood mentality behind it. Stealing is still wrong.. but if you're trying to do good I can at least understand where you're coming from.

However they didn't steal from the rich and give to the poor did they? No .. they stole from average everyday Americans, the vast majority of which were middle income and lower income folks. I don't see how that could be cheered on, regardless of who they donated to.


they think if they do this enough, we'll get nice and mad at the government and stage a violent revolution.
et.al, starving people will flood the street and kill each other and steal what's left. they leave out the gruesome parts, where the dictator steps in and the rest of the planet goes into a tail spin down to oblivion, since he'll be at the head of the most lethal war technology in written history.

in the immortal words of homer simpson... "doh."



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 03:07 AM
link   
With all this repetition about "stealing from the average joe", I think it might do good to clarify (what many people have already said here, although their words may be falling through the cracks,) that...

The "Average Joe" isn't going to lose any money. Since all the names stolen from were reported, the cardholders AREN'T the ones who will pay. It'll be the credit card companies.



Now this cost MAY trickle down to the consumer through increased interest rates on payments or something, but the "average joe" cardholder is NOT the one who would be paying for this. The only trouble would probably be like what schuyler said happened to him/her: the hassle of having to get new cards and all.

Personally, if this loosens the credit-card culture in the US, I'd think it a good thing. Besides, considering the shoddy security used by Stratfor, it'd be better that someone like this stole it and donated it to charities (notwithstanding the less than charitable intentions of said charities
), rather than someone who actually was just in it for the money.
edit on 27-12-2011 by babloyi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aliensun

Originally posted by LiveEquation


Should we cheer Anonymous or should we jeer at them? I read this article and had mixed feelings about them.

-Is it ok to steal money and give it to charities?

-Is the money being stolen(insured money) actually also stolen money from an average Joe like you and myself.

One again, should we cheer and jeer at Anonymous?

I cheer with caution

www.techspot.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



Has no one, a parent, school, or offical every explained to you the difference between right and wrong?
Can you not on your own make a moral decision? Or do you have no morals, only an allegiance to, "Tear it down, man, It's all bad?"


Morals are subjective. Yours differ from mine, mine differ from the next guy.... and so on.

For instance.

If you are taking money from those with an over abundance that made that over abundance by theft themselves... I see ZERO wrong with reallocating those funds back to the people.

This is what Anon did, btw. And the money is insured, meaning if there are innocent people losing money, their covered. (I.E. They get it back.)

I cheer, not jeer. And yes, I have morals. I don't kill/steal/rob/injure/taunt people..... However, in a proper context... I can support others who do so... (when my morals deem it justified.)

Morals are not right and wrong.

There is no right and wrong, only what you do and don't mind... which clearly differs vastly from person to person.

No need to be a crusader, because essentially in your crusade, you attempt to impose your moral values on other people. Which is generally looked down upon in society... (But not always, because some people don't mind others imposing ideas upon themselves.)

Do you see where I'm standing yet?

P.S.
This was officially called "#OpRobinHood." This was totally their intention. To steal some wealth from thieves and give it back to the people. There is no better way to do that beside charity, AFAIK.
edit on 27-12-2011 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Laokin
 


granny doesn't know she can get it back and nobody goes to her house to tell her, cause it just isn't important when you're busy bringing down the evil capitalists. like granny, that evil capitalist who, as was already demonstrated, would only have the large sum of money she has because her husband worked his whole damn life to provide it.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
It is never ok to steal money in any situation , i dont care who needs it, or for what reason.

If you take 5-10 dollars to get a meal (Stolen) ... i am more sympathetic of course. You take ONLY what you need from the outer fields.

Never ever is stealing ok unless you are literally in a life or death situation.

edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Considering they're stealing and giving to the red cross, it seems to be highly likely the stolen money is going to "life and death situations".

Plus Barr has been in executive positions, and has a history with Anonymous - which proved he's a pathological narcissist. He prob only donates to charity for the tax credits.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Use Prepaid credit cards for ALL online purchases. You don't get the "rewards" but you also don't have $1,000's of dollars exposed to the internet.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
Why's everyone creating such a huge fuss over this?

The banks will return the money to all those people who have lost funds/ID's stolen.

Ultimately the banks will pay the price and as we all know such a loss does not even account to 0.00000000001% to how much banks actually make robbing everyone on this planet.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by forklift
Why's everyone creating such a huge fuss over this?

The banks will return the money to all those people who have lost funds/ID's stolen.

Ultimately the banks will pay the price and as we all know such a loss does not even account to 0.00000000001% to how much banks actually make robbing everyone on this planet.



do you know for certain that they will fix the debit if the person doens't realize they've been robbed? i remember a cc i had that went up to 10k, and all we ever used it for was pizza. none of us could figure out how we managed to eat 10k in pizza. pretty sure we didn't, but we don't have that cc anymore, just the bill to pay back and no idea how to determine if all of those charges were ours. entirely possible some pizza delivery guy bought pizzas all around for his buddies. meanwhile, i look like homeless person and have the health to match it (maybe i did eat 10k in pizza but i doubt it. don't think it's possible to do in just a couple years)
edit on 27-12-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join