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.
FBI says that they have dismantled the Anonymous group of hackers because most of its “largest players” have been arrested or detained by US law enforcement authorities.
But do you think, something like this, NO because everything is going invert of this just after this announcement from FBI that they have cut down Anonymous in pieces or dismantled them, Anonymous group of hackers dumped large amounts of data that appears to have been stolen from FBI servers.
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by purplemer
This is the point of Anonymous. ANYONE CAN BE. It's not a core group, it's a movement. It is freedom, it is expression. It's an art form, a demonstration of initiative and vision. It's an idea. And whoever acts on that idea, is now...Anonymous.edit on 23-8-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
Anon is a group
First and foremost, Anonymous is NOT a group, or an organization, or coherent collective of any sort. Anonymous is more like...an idea, a concept. Technically everyone and anyone is Anonymous. It's simply the name given to any collective action carried out virally by a large mass of people. Its ranks, goals, intentions and ideals are completely fluid, changing as easily as the wind. It's a kind of social ocean that occasionally builds itself up into a massive tsunami of sheer social willpower. The ocean isn't organized, it's not a sentient presence, it's not a "group", it merely is what it is...nature. THAT is what Anonymous is, it is simply the collective social nature of the Internet itself.
We don't need anymore shadowy anonymous organizations deciding what is best for the world, thank you. If we are so dissatisfied with the current situation we will make changes through the proper, more defined, channels available to us.
Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by purplemer
Abstract philosophical notions do not hack the FBI!
Bradley Manning tried using the correct channels.
Thanks for your reply....
Yes they do and they did..
Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by purplemer
Thanks for your reply....
Your welcome.
Yes they do and they did..
No they don't!
We don't need anymore shadowy anonymous organizations deciding what is best for the world, thank you. If we are so dissatisfied with the current situation we will make changes through the proper, more defined, channels available to us.
We don't need anymore shadowy anonymous organizations deciding what is best for the world, thank you. If we are so dissatisfied with the current situation we will make changes through the proper, more defined, channels available to us.
Have a nice day.
Releasing massive amounts of classfied information to another shadowy unknown entity is not "The proper channels!"
In 2010, while stationed at Forward Operating Base Hammer in Baghdad, Pfc. Bradley Manning decided to approach a superior officer in his chain of command to voice his concern about something he had stumbled upon in his capacity as an intelligence analyst. His unit had been helping Iraqi federal police identify suspects for detention and discovered that fifteen men had been arrested for producing “anti-Iraqi literature." After having a high-resolution photo of the “literature” translated into English, Manning discovered that the writing was hardly criminal; it was a "scholarly critique" of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. But his superior officer did not want to hear about it. Manning knew if he continued to assist the police in identifying political opponents, innocent people would be jailed, likely tortured, and “not seen again for a very long time, if ever,” as he told a military courtroom in Fort Meade, MD on February 28. Hoping to expose what was happening ahead of the Iraq parliamentary election, on March 7, 2010, Manning shared the information with WikiLeaks.