Just as "Al Qaeda" has become a pretext for draconian security measures whose ultimate effect is absolute control over domestic populations,
"Anonymous" is now a bogeyman governments can point to as a justification for similar measures online.
We need to be protected from "Anonymous", which is why governments must scrutinize everything that comes into, goes out of or resides on our personal
computers, and every shred of personal information stored on any social media website. And collect it. And analyze it for troublesome patterns of
behavior such as criminality or independent thought.
That the "protest" in this case is over a website devoted to illegally distributing copyrighted material is icing on the cake, since it highlights the
notion that not only is "Anonymous" dangerous, but that extreme, unreasonable and intrusive measures are also needed to combat online piracy -- the
most popular pretext used to promote shocking, Gestapo-esque regimes for absolute Internet control.
Pro Tip for Wannabe Hacktivists: If someone from "Anonymous" or any known online "hacker" group approaches you and asks you to join them in "fighting
the system", they are almost certainly affiliated with, or under the direct surveillance of, a government agency interested in entrapping and
"Anonymous" can be anyone, including governments and their agents or informants, as has already been publicly demonstrated in the "LulzSec" bust (and
that's just the one case they made public; other sting operations are almost certainly underway and will likely continue indefinitely), rendering any
concept of it serving as a vehicle for social or political change utterly meaningless.
"Anonymous" (outside of 4chan, anyway) is dead. Long live independent thought and action -- and, hopefully, a little common sense.
edit on 5/5/2012 by Majic because: (no reason given)