We Are Legion

[~V~]

We have Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters

Really? How so?

Check out the growing list of arrested Anonymous hackers:
Wikipedia: Anonymous (group): Arrests

How did safety in numbers help them? No crowds stormed the police stations. No-one blew up the British Parliament. If there was any crowd-funded legal defence for any significant number of them - let alone any one of them - I missed it.

What is this Safety in Numbers of which you speak?

:arrow:

Four billion years of evolutionary success encoded deep within the fabric of every strand of our d n a. Four billion years of evolutionary success has brought us here. A turning point for humanity, into a new aeon. An age that has pierced light into darkness illuminating all things. Chaos has never died, the truth of this world is that no one is in control, there are no rulers, there are no masters, there are no elite. Words rule the game, words have power, place no belief in these words and alone they are meaningless. Once we come to the realization of this, then and only then can we truly liberate our minds from the illusionists and it's imposed chains and shackles that have held us in captivity for far too long. Many great minds have paved the way for the coming revelation, we are not alone for we stand on the shoulders of giants. The time to take control of our reality is now. This is the time to wake up, this is the time to expose all lies, this is the time we send from darkness. We are the bees, TYLER is the hive and information is the honey. Imagine we are one. Imagine we are united. Imagine we are the true bearers of light. Imagine we leak it all. We are Anonymous. You are Project Mayhem 2012. United as one, divided by zero. We will create a new world while the old world crumbles. 12.21.2012, Expect us.
Project Mayhem 2012 Tyler: http://pastebin.com/Wt15GXTn

[rstrong]

We have Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters

Really? How so?

Check out the growing list of arrested Anonymous hackers:
Wikipedia: Anonymous (group): Arrests

How did safety in numbers help them? No crowds stormed the police stations. No-one blew up the British Parliament. If there was any crowd-funded legal defence for any significant number of them - let alone any one of them - I missed it.

What is this Safety in Numbers of which you speak?

:arrow:

Four billion years of evolutionary success encoded deep within the fabric of every strand of our d n a. Four billion years of evolutionary success has brought us here. A turning point for humanity, into a new aeon. An age that has pierced light into darkness illuminating all things. Chaos has never died, the truth of this world is that no one is in control, there are no rulers, there are no masters, there are no elite. Words rule the game, words have power, place no belief in these words and alone they are meaningless. Once we come to the realization of this, then and only then can we truly liberate our minds from the illusionists and it's imposed chains and shackles that have held us in captivity for far too long. Many great minds have paved the way for the coming revelation, we are not alone for we stand on the shoulders of giants. The time to take control of our reality is now. This is the time to wake up, this is the time to expose all lies, this is the time we send from darkness. We are the bees, TYLER is the hive and information is the honey. Imagine we are one. Imagine we are united. Imagine we are the true bearers of light. Imagine we leak it all. We are Anonymous. You are Project Mayhem 2012. United as one, divided by zero. We will create a new world while the old world crumbles. 12.21.2012, Expect us.

PM2012 Mirror: http://pm2012.galat.org/pm20… Project Mayhem 2012 'Dangerous Ideas #1 and #2': http://pastebin.com/sLLwJbtz Project Mayhem 2012 Tyler: http://pastebin.com/Wt15GXTn

If you don't have an answer, just say so.

As a movement, you probably should have an answer to this question.

[~V~]

We have Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters

Really? How so?

Check out the growing list of arrested Anonymous hackers:
Wikipedia: Anonymous (group): Arrests

How did safety in numbers help them? No crowds stormed the police stations. No-one blew up the British Parliament. If there was any crowd-funded legal defence for any significant number of them - let alone any one of them - I missed it.

What is this Safety in Numbers of which you speak?

:arrow:

Four billion years of evolutionary success encoded deep within the fabric of every strand of our d n a. Four billion years of evolutionary success has brought us here. A turning point for humanity, into a new aeon. An age that has pierced light into darkness illuminating all things. Chaos has never died, the truth of this world is that no one is in control, there are no rulers, there are no masters, there are no elite. Words rule the game, words have power, place no belief in these words and alone they are meaningless. Once we come to the realization of this, then and only then can we truly liberate our minds from the illusionists and it's imposed chains and shackles that have held us in captivity for far too long. Many great minds have paved the way for the coming revelation, we are not alone for we stand on the shoulders of giants. The time to take control of our reality is now. This is the time to wake up, this is the time to expose all lies, this is the time we send from darkness. We are the bees, TYLER is the hive and information is the honey. Imagine we are one. Imagine we are united. Imagine we are the true bearers of light. Imagine we leak it all. We are Anonymous. You are Project Mayhem 2012. United as one, divided by zero. We will create a new world while the old world crumbles. 12.21.2012, Expect us.

Project Mayhem 2012 Tyler: http://pastebin.com/Wt15GXTn

If you don't have an answer, just say so.

As a movement, you probably should have an answer to this question.

[rstrong]

Nice picture. Old saying. Still not an answer.

[~V~]

Nice picture. Old saying. Still not an answer.

[rstrong]

As I said, if you don't have an answer, just say so.

[mike]

Hmmm, "V" appears to be far too enamored with Guido Fawkes that he/she cannot present any reply other than an ode to the fella via continued picture posting.

[rstrong]

Hmmm, "V" appears to be far too enamored with Guido Fawkes that he/she cannot present any reply other than an ode to the fella via continued picture posting.

Yup. And then there's Guido's fate: Caught, tortured, convicted, and sentenced to have his genitals cut off and burned before his eyes (yes, really) before being drawn and quartered.

The only "strength in numbers" was that the confessions tortured out of him led to others sharing his fate.

This after his bomb plot failed. And every year since then, Guy Fawkes Day, devoted to ridiculing him.

This is just like the Republican anti-tax crowd protesters naming themselves after the Boston Tea Party - perhaps the only protest in history against the *lowering* of taxes. Their heart is in the right place, but the group as a whole didn't do basic research on their chosen symbol.

[bannination]

Anonymous has been effective and few of its hackers have been busted. Who cares if "safety in numbers" is more of a reality or a wish? For better or worse, it's given us a vision of the future citizen-driven internet. Better to discuss its campaigns, goals and tactics (I have mixed feelings) than to dwell on a phrase similar to ones used by all successful and unsuccessful movements.

I've sure chanted, "El pueblo unido jamás será vencido" when I've known that we were more of a fringe than "the people", and more likely to be defeated than not.

Que the new accusations of you being a female Mexican health care worker leeching off the government.

[Leo Lyons]

I can't believe this. This shit revived again? Does this \V/ joker breathe, eat, sleep this crap or what?
One paranoid so and so.

[\V/]

I can't believe this. This shit revived again? Does this \V/ joker breathe, eat, sleep this crap or what?
One paranoid so and so.

How do you label 'civil rights' crap?
BTW~I'm not sure what your definition of paranoid is, but I can assure you I am not

[~V~]

Hmmm, "V" appears to be far too enamored with Guido Fawkes that he/she cannot present any reply other than an ode to the fella via continued picture posting.

Yup. And then there's Guido's fate: Caught, tortured, convicted, and sentenced to have his genitals cut off and burned before his eyes (yes, really) before being drawn and quartered.

The only "strength in numbers" was that the confessions tortured out of him led to others sharing his fate.

This after his bomb plot failed. And every year since then, Guy Fawkes Day, devoted to ridiculing him.

This is just like the Republican anti-tax crowd protesters naming themselves after the Boston Tea Party - perhaps the only protest in history against the *lowering* of taxes. Their heart is in the right place, but the group as a whole didn't do basic research on their chosen symbol.

[rstrong]

Anonymous has been effective and few of its hackers have been busted.

I count 88+ arrests, plus 40 more served with search warrants and warned by the FBI. And no doubt there are more, just not officially linked to Anonymous or listed in the article.

Add another 13 arrests of LulzSec members, with several others having their computers seized. I recommend reading that entire "Law enforcement response" section BTW. It'll cure anyone of the notion that active Anonymous members enjoy any anonymity or protection.

Who cares if "safety in numbers" is more of a reality or a wish?.

That would be those who have been arrested, only to find out that their anonymity and safety in numbers were both a myth.

I don't much disagree with the intentions of Anonymous. If they want to convince teenagers and young adults that they're soldiers in the war against the rich and powerful, well, there's a lot that's commendable about that too.... so long as you're honest with them about what they're getting into.

But Anonymous hasn't been using them as soldiers; they've been using them as suicide bombers. They use false claims of invincibility and safety in numbers. Once the teen carries out his attack, he finds out that his anonymity was a myth. The "numbers" he expected to support him are nowhere to be found. Even the expected glory, prestige and popular support from Anonymous turns out to be no more real than the 72 virgins those other suicide bombers expect.

[\V/]

Anonymous has been effective and few of its hackers have been busted.

I count 88+ arrests, plus 40 more served with search warrants and warned by the FBI. And no doubt there are more, just not officially linked to Anonymous or listed in the article.

Add another 13 arrests of LulzSec members, with several others having their computers seized. I recommend reading that entire "Law enforcement response" section BTW. It'll cure anyone of the notion that active Anonymous members enjoy any anonymity or protection.

Who cares if "safety in numbers" is more of a reality or a wish?.

That would be those who have been arrested, only to find out that their anonymity and safety in numbers were both a myth.

I don't much disagree with the intentions of Anonymous. If they want to convince teenagers and young adults that they're soldiers in the war against the rich and powerful, well, there's a lot that's commendable about that too.... so long as you're honest with them about what they're getting into.

But Anonymous hasn't been using them as soldiers; they've been using them as suicide bombers. They use false claims of invincibility and safety in numbers. Once the teen carries out his attack, he finds out that his anonymity was a myth. The "numbers" he expected to support him are nowhere to be found. Even the expected glory, prestige and popular support from Anonymous turns out to be no more real than the 72 virgins those other suicide bombers expect.

Tell you what rstrong...attempting to equate Anonymous to 'suicide bombers' makes no sense...just saying

[rstrong]

Tell you what rstrong...attempting to equate Anonymous to 'suicide bombers' makes no sense...just saying

They wind some teen or young adult up with dishonest claims of glory and invincibility. They hand him a weapon, like the DDoS software used in the 2010 DDoS attack against major credit card companies that they told all the WikiLeaks supporters to download and run, or some script used to exploit known weaknesses in email servers. Or maybe he carries out his own hack.

Then he's arrested, jailed and/or his computer equipment taken away. He has a criminal record for life. The invincibility was a myth. The glory doesn't appear. The damage, more often than not, was entirely to himself.

Given the record of arrests, it's your attempt to equate Anonymous with being part of an organization that will grant you protection through anonymity and strength in numbers, that makes no sense. The more realistic portrayal of Anonymous hackers has been someone suckered into being a lone attacker with no real protection, the first and often only casualty of his attack, and quickly forgotten. Sound familiar?

[\V/]

Tell you what rstrong...attempting to equate Anonymous to 'suicide bombers' makes no sense...just saying

They wind some teen or young adult up with dishonest claims of glory and invincibility. They hand him a weapon, like the DDoS software used in the 2010 DDoS attack against major credit card companies that they told all the WikiLeaks supporters to download and run, or some script used to exploit known weaknesses in email servers. Or maybe he carries out his own hack.

Then he's arrested, jailed and/or his computer equipment taken away. He has a criminal record for life. The invincibility was a myth. The glory doesn't appear. The damage, more often than not, was entirely to himself.

Given the record of arrests, it's your attempt to equate Anonymous with being part of an organization that will grant you protection through anonymity and strength in numbers, that makes no sense. The more realistic portrayal of Anonymous hackers has been someone suckered into being a lone attacker with no real protection, the first and often only casualty of his attack, and quickly forgotten. Sound familiar?

And explain where the 'suicide' part comes in

[\V/]

Or even the 'bomb' event

[rstrong]

Tell you what rstrong...attempting to equate Anonymous to 'suicide bombers' makes no sense...just saying

They wind some teen or young adult up with dishonest claims of glory and invincibility. They hand him a weapon, like the DDoS software used in the 2010 DDoS attack against major credit card companies that they told all the WikiLeaks supporters to download and run, or some script used to exploit known weaknesses in email servers. Or maybe he carries out his own hack.

Then he's arrested, jailed and/or his computer equipment taken away. He has a criminal record for life. The invincibility was a myth. The glory doesn't appear. The damage, more often than not, was entirely to himself.

Given the record of arrests, it's your attempt to equate Anonymous with being part of an organization that will grant you protection through anonymity and strength in numbers, that makes no sense. The more realistic portrayal of Anonymous hackers has been someone suckered into being a lone attacker with no real protection, the first and often only casualty of his attack, and quickly forgotten. Sound familiar?

And explain where the 'suicide' part comes in

[\V/]

Tell you what rstrong...attempting to equate Anonymous to 'suicide bombers' makes no sense...just saying

They wind some teen or young adult up with dishonest claims of glory and invincibility. They hand him a weapon, like the DDoS software used in the 2010 DDoS attack against major credit card companies that they told all the WikiLeaks supporters to download and run, or some script used to exploit known weaknesses in email servers. Or maybe he carries out his own hack.

Then he's arrested, jailed and/or his computer equipment taken away. He has a criminal record for life. The invincibility was a myth. The glory doesn't appear. The damage, more often than not, was entirely to himself.

Given the record of arrests, it's your attempt to equate Anonymous with being part of an organization that will grant you protection through anonymity and strength in numbers, that makes no sense. The more realistic portrayal of Anonymous hackers has been someone suckered into being a lone attacker with no real protection, the first and often only casualty of his attack, and quickly forgotten. Sound familiar?

And explain where the 'suicide' part comes in

Your perspective seems extreme...just saying

[rstrong]

Your perspective seems extreme...just saying

Extreme or not, the perspective is still valid. The attacker's promised anonymity and invicibility is a sham, the implied glory is a sham, and most of the damage is done to the attacker.