Interpol site down???? Anonymous in action?

but...

I do find it interested that 2 days ago Anon declared they'd release something major about Goldman Sachs..
Goldman Sachs being the HEAD of the snake..

and the next thing I hear? large amounts of their group are arrested in a surprise raid before anything was released..

for a globally known entity that uses trust and public support to continue, it seems odd theyd make a daring announcement and not follow through with it, especially when they know mass amounts of genuine people will believe them when declare such.

Somethings happening... i think todays strike against the interpol website is a red herring designed to make us look the other way, stop reading the stratfor emails and to not question WHAT anon were going to release.

Imagine if the FEDS took down Anon's ability to communicate with each other.. and instead started performing its own devious propaganda, accept under a anon flag?

reply to post by Agit8dChop


Thats a scary prospect buddy, but for them to remove our way of communicating would mean the end of the internet - period.

Also there are many that call themselves Anonymous but few have the real ideals of Anon at heart. Something where we need to tread with caution. You raise valid points and more the reason to be careful how we go about things. 25 isn't really that many when you thing about how many potential Anon members there are globally.

Take Operation BlackOut, turned out to be nothing to do With Anonymous actual and was soon disowned by Anon actual. I dare bet there are 'false Flag' ops going on trying to destabilize what we are trying to do but this is just a sign of the times and should be countered and corrected as soon as it is apparent something is wrong.

Didn't take them long to get it back up did it

reply to post by sykonot


The point wasn't to take them down for good, more to disrupt

Originally posted by YipMan
i cant really say that i suppor nor condone them as im not clued up enough to have a properly informed voice

Personally, I don't always support what Anonymous do, but I nearly always support why they're doing it. So ends yes, means no, in other words. Then again, some of them would probably reply that although I consider DDoSing largely useless, there isn't necessarily much else that they can do either; and at least that way, they get to feel as though they're doing something.

Another caveat is that I think that some of the people who are afraid of Soros being able to personal army/hijack/infiltrate Anon, are probably right. Anonymous have been drifting slowly but increasingly leftward ever since Chanology; personally I think there has been far too much of an involvement with Occupy and offline ops, and also too much straying from their original motivation to protect the Internet itself.

My own ideal role for Anon, would be network-based espionage; ideally to the point where governments and corporations lost the ability to keep secrets more or less entirely. I think they need to stay off the streets, (where they are exposed to the usual offline vulnerabilities, such as being arrested and/or shot at) and focus their efforts on exposing as much of the internal communications of both Uncle Sam and the corporate world as possible. These organisations need to become accountable to the public. I am not a raving Communist, personally, and so I don't see a need to get rid of the corporate world completely; but I do very much want to see it having to bear some real responsibility for what it does, and at the moment, that isn't the case.

DDoSing, by itself, is juvenile and pointless. Aside from being ineffectual, it is the act of a group of frustrated, enraged 14 year olds who want to mindlessly smash things, as a means of expressing said frustration. If Anonymous want to maintain their effectiveness for intimidating proponents of the system, and helping to produce real justice, then sooner or later their tactics are going to have to mature accordingly.

Originally posted by StarTraveller
Also there are many that call themselves Anonymous but few have the real ideals of Anon at heart.

That is a bit of a paradoxical statement, don't you think?

I used to think I had some idea of what the "real ideals," of Anonymous are or were, but these days I'm not so sure. I think there has been altogether too much hijacking by the radical left. The Political Compass has me pegged as being west of Nelson Mandella, but I have my doubts. There are large amounts of what self-identifies as the political left that I don't like at all, to be honest; I don't think it's so much that I'm a Communist, as much as that I agree with Orwell that the cure is likely to be just as bad as the disease itself.

I don't think Anon were all that hard left pre-Chanology, personally. I think that op bought a lot of publicity, but unfortunately also brought Anonymous to the attention of some Marxist elements, with whom it would have been much better if they had never heard of Anonymous at all.

The idea that everyone can be Anonymous possibly isn't such a great idea; because you potentially end up with people who you really don't want at all.