posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 08:07 AM
I'd also like to mention that if "Anonymous" does not have proof of the Syrian Government's involvement that is not circumstantial at best, this
may be the battlefield they die upon.
1) You can't throw yourself onto a side of a conflict where no factual data is available, and expect to come out squeaky clean. There are
things you can do that will sully your name, your "organisation" and your entire philosophy in the eyes of the world, and unjustly backing the wrong
side because the "factoids" against the other side seem more truthy.
2) You can't "declare war" on a country without consequences. "Anonymous" as a "group" has made some powerful enemies, if the stories are to be
believed. The governments and organisations involved do not play games. If you are perceived as a threat, they will locate you, and neutralize the
threat. This does not apply only to countries that have been targeted, but to any country or organization that has something to hide. All Anonymous
has shown so far is that they can see things people thought were private. That should make them a perceived thread to every clandestine operation,
and every top-secret installation in the world. Is that really how "they" want this to go down? The fact that anyone could be "Anonymous" is not
a help in this case. That means anyone can speak on their behalf. No one will know what the official word is. Is there an official word? They
could even target groups without "Anonymous" knowing about it.
I started off willing to give "Anonymous" the benefit of the doubt. I hope this isn't the situation where they blow it. That would be stupid.