Anonymous ...

talesin

As you may or may not know, a group called "Anonymous" shut down MasterCard last December, protesting suppression of news about the war in Afghanistan ....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/mastercard-down-hacked-wikileaks-ddos_n_793625.html

Anyone seen this vid?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5nwNa-BncA&feature=share

Apparently, another attack is planned for September 24. It will be interesting to see what the 'news' brings tommorow. By the way, this video is banned from Facebook, and when I posted it,,, it mysteriously disappeared from my feed. So did a link to the Huffington Post article.

curiouser and curiouser ....

tal

cedars

Hm, what disturbs me about them is the focus on anarchy. They keep repeating "non-violent" etc, but then they show videos of riots and people fighting the police, as though this is what they want people to do while they're busy doing their hacking. I'm all for freedom of speech, but I can't stand mindless thugs making ordinary people's lives miserable just because they are desperate for an opportunity to fight with a policeman or smash a shop window. We had that with the recent UK riots, and it was awful. It would be nicer if this group could distance themselves from this sort of behaviour rather than openly portraying it on their video.

I also don't get all the "V for Vendetta" references. Can't they be original and come up with their own imagery rather than taking images from films they obviously like? I hope they don't try and shut down JWN because I've said this.

talesin

I think the violence is about the wars going on (ie background) ,, not what they are promoting. From what I've been able to learn, it's about throwing a monkey wrench into things, not inciting violence.

The concept of 'anarchy' is quite misunderstood. The Hollywood-style 'mob rule' depicted in Mad Max does not reflect anarchists' philosophy. It is more about freedom from rules,,, kind of like what we were talking about in the godless world thread. Anarchy teaches that the general consensus would determine what happens, instead of a ruling class, and trusts in the basic goodness of people.

Learned a few things about it from a punk I used to be quite close with. And they, like all strata of society, have the fringe element, but most punks are merely anti-establishment.

Interesting to see if anything starts happening in about, oh, 2 or 3 hours from now ...

t

cedars

I'm all for greater autonomy and social mobility, but my trusty dictionary contains the following definitions:

Anarchy n. total lack of organized control, resulting in disorder or lawlessness; this disorder.

Anarchist n. person who believes that government is undesirable and should be abolished.

Those are dictionary definitions, not my own interpretation. In my opinion, neither of those two mindsets offer a viable solution for a peaceful or "free" society. There always needs to be a degree of governance, and well-qualified individuals who have been appointed to make decisions on behalf of the masses.

I'm sure when the UK riots were underway, those who were having their shop windows smashed or their homes burned weren't thinking "Oh good, the anarchists are here! Now we can have greater freedom from rules, and the general populace (rather than the ruling class) can have a say in how our society is run!"

I'm not saying I'm against what "anonymous" purports to stand for, but I think the constant depictions of rioting and acts of violence against authority figures in their video could easily be misinterpreted as a "call to arms".

talesin

It's already a bloody revolution if you live in the projects,,, kids are dying left, right and centre. Things aren't gonna get any better, and the lawmakers aren't doing much of a bang-up job.

We can agree to disagree on this one, if you're okay with that. :)

tal

cedars

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the status quo either. If anything, I can't make up my mind whether it's good or bad, which in itself indicates that this is a worthy thread and the group themselves are worthy of some serious consideration. I was just expressing how myself and some others may react to these scenes of rioting and mob violence that are depicted on the video, even if the group are expressly against it, it still feels as though it is condoned when you throw in the references to "V for Vendetta" etc - not forgetting that those masks were used extensively in the recent UK riots by those whose actions sprang from selfish and nefarious motives rather than any genuine desire to advance social mobility, freedom and fairness etc.

I was actually just thinking about "anonymous" in the context of the WTBTS. Wouldn't it be TERRIBLE if they crashed the Society's web and email system, thereby halting production of magazines for a month or more? The worldwide brotherhood would then have missed an issue of the regular spiritual food at the proper time, and Jehovah would evidently have done nothing to stop this from happening, raising doubts among Witnesses that this is truly God's channel of communication.

Now wouldn't THAT be a shame?

J. Hofer

anarchy may or may not imply political disorder or lawlessness

anonymous are not organized hierarchically. that means, some do this, some do that, and they all call themselves anonymous or lulzsec or whatever. they did a great job in defacing scientology, i hope something similar would be launched at the WTS someday. they also did some stupid stuff. they are anonymous, some do stuff for ideology, some do stuff because they are bad, some do it "for the lulz". either way, i'm glad they provide some additional control mechanism in a world where everybody is lied to by everyone who is part of some hierarchy.

cedars

I was just going off my Oxford dictionary definition... I can't see how my dictionary can be wrong just because a punk rocker feels the word should mean something else...

Learned a few things about it from a punk I used to be quite close with. And they, like all strata of society, have the fringe element, but most punks are merely anti-establishment.

I don't mean to upset anyone by the way, I'm only offering an honest opinion. I don't think people should just be allowed to re-write the dictionary to make bad words good as they see fit.

talesin

yes, cedars, this

not forgetting that those masks were used extensively in the recent UK riots by those whose actions sprang from selfish and nefarious motives rather than any genuine desire to advance social mobility, freedom and fairness etc.

... is a problem.

Interesting side note. During the recent G20(?) riots in Canada (2010), three Ontario Police officers were arrested for inciting riot. Dressed in black, with the black kerchiefs over their faces, it was their undercover job to 'pretend' to be protestors, and they were inciting. It was quite the scandal here in Canada. Kinda makes you wonder ....

hmmm, that's a thought, cedars ... perhaps anonymous would be interested in our cause... the thing about it is, there is no organization, it is individuals acting on their own ..random acts.

And yes, that would be a shame ....

t

cedars

Yes, it would be terrible. WHATEVER YOU DO talesin, DON'T approach Anonymous with details about the WBTS oppression of dissenters and ask them to consider taking action against them. I don't think I could bear for anything like THAT to happen.

Anonymous ...

Share this