Anonymous Message to NATO

Originally posted by CaptGizmo

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Oh no!!! What will Anon do... a DoS attack so that NATO employees can't access You Tube (yawn) give me a break.

I used to kind of like Anon... until they made me miss out on a months worth of Call of Duty: Black Ops.

edit on 7-6-2011 by OptimusSubprime because: (no reason given)

And sorry to say... your post points out that you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. You care more about missing a month of a video game that demonstrates killing people and yet Anon. has stated they are doing these things to fight against the tyranny of the global Cabal for all of us .(Yawn) back at you.

edit on 6/7/2011 by CaptGizmo because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/7/2011 by CaptGizmo because: (no reason given)

There's a lot of yawning going on around here. My comment regarding missing out on video game time was tongue in cheek. Anon is retarded.

They had me right up until they used the term 'bro'. Lost a lot of credibility IMO.

Originally posted by Oozii
[font=Tahoma] We fight for freedom. For ourselves, and the people of the world, we seek to preserve the liberty granted to the millions of people who have found it on the Internet.

Yet again, they are unable to see how worst the internet will be once they've stopped having fun with their stupidities.

Oh and dear Anon, please oh please, do not fight on my behalf. If I wanna be part of this, I will let you know, and there is a HELL OF A LOT more people not interested in being part of who you "fight for".

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Oh no!!! What will Anon do... a DoS attack so that NATO employees can't access You Tube (yawn) give me a break.

I used to kind of like Anon... until they made me miss out on a months worth of Call of Duty: Black Ops.

edit on 7-6-2011 by OptimusSubprime because: (no reason given)

I just threw up in my mouth a little ....

ummm dont know what your sorces are for that message that was sent to nato i found a diffrent one that they sent il track it down real fast and post it i dont know how to do the hole adding from offsite comment thing but il copy and paste and also put down my sorces give me 2 min to find it agin

Greetings, members of NATO. We are Anonymous.

In a recent publication, you have singled out Anonymous as a threat to "government and the people". You have also alleged that secrecy is a 'necessary evil' and that transparency is npt always the right way forward.

Anonymous would like to remind you that the government and the people are, contrary to the supposed foundations of "democracy", distinct entities with often conflicting goals and desires. It is Anonymous' position that when there is a conflict of interest between the government and the people, it is the people's will which must take priority. The only threat transparency poses to government is to threaten government's ability to act in a manner which the people would disagree with, without having to face democratic consequences and accountability for such behaviour. Your own report cites a perfect example of this, the Anonymous attack on HBGary. Whether HBGary were acting in the cause of security or military gain is irrelevant - their actions were illegal and morally reprehensible. Anonymous does not accept that the government and/or the military has the right to be above the law and to use the phoney cliche of "national security" to justify illegal and deceptive activities. If the government must break the rules, they must also be willing to accept the democratic consequences of this at the ballot box.We do not accept the current status quo whereby a government can tell one story to the people and another in private. Dishonesty and secrecy totally undermine the concept of self rule. How can the people judge for whom to vote unless they are fully aware of what policies said politicians are actually pursuing?

When a government is elected, it is said to "represent" the nation it governs. This essentially means that the actions of a government are not the actions of the people in government, but are actions taken on behalf of every citizen in that country. It is unacceptable to have a situation in which the people are, in many cases, totally and utterly unaware of what is being said and done on their behalf - behind closed doors.

Anonymous and WikiLeaks are distinct entities. The actions of Anonymous were not aided or even requested by WikiLeaks. However, Anonymous and WikiLeaks do share one common attribute: They are no threat to any organization - unless that organization is doing something wrong and attempting to get away with it.

We do not wish to threaten anybody's way of life. We do not wish to dictate anything to anybody. We do not wish to terrorize any nation.

We merely wish to remove power from vested interests and return it to the people - who, in a democracy, it should never have been taken from in the first place.
The government makes the law. This does not give them the right to break it. If the government was doing nothing underhand or illegal, there would be nothing "embarassing" about Wikileaks revelations, nor would there have been any scandal emanating from HBGary. The resulting scandals were not a result of Anonymous' or Wikileaks' revelations, they were the result of the CONTENT of those revelations. And responsibility for that content can be laid solely at the doorstep of policymakers who, like any corrupt entity, naively believed that they were above the law and that they would not be caught.

A lot of government and corporate comment has been dedicated to "how we can avoid a similar leak in the future". Such advice ranges from better security, to lower levels of clearance, from harsher penalties for whistleblowers, to censorship of the press.

Our message is simple: Do not lie to the people and you won't have to worry about your lies being exposed. Do not make corrupt deals and you won't have to worry about your corruption being laid bare. Do not break the rules and you won't have to worry about getting in trouble for it.

Do not attempt to repair your two faces by concealing one of them. Instead, try having only one face - an honest, open and democratic one.

You know you do not fear us because we are a threat to society. You fear us because we are a threat to the established hierarchy. Anonymous has proven over the last several years that a hierarchy is not necessary in order to achieve great progress - perhaps what you truly fear in us, is the realization of your own irrelevance in an age which has outgrown its reliance on you. Your true terror is not in a collective of activists, but in the fact that you and everything you stand for have, by the changing tides and the advancement of technology, are now surplus to requirements.

Finally, do not make the mistake of challenging Anonymous. Do not make the mistake of believing you can behead a headless snake. If you slice off one head of Hydra, ten more heads will grow in its place. If you cut down one Anon, ten more will join us purely out of anger at your trampling of dissent.

Your only chance of defeating the movement which binds all of us is to accept it. This is no longer your world. It is our world - the people's world.

We are Anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us...

sorce: anonnews.yup.name...

Originally posted by stormy01399
Greetings, members of NATO. We are Anonymous.

In a recent publication, you have singled out Anonymous as a threat to "government and the people". You have also alleged that secrecy is a 'necessary evil' and that transparency is npt always the right way forward.

Anonymous would like to remind you that the government and the people are, contrary to the supposed foundations of "democracy", distinct entities with often conflicting goals and desires. It is Anonymous' position that when there is a conflict of interest between the government and the people, it is the people's will which must take priority. The only threat transparency poses to government is to threaten government's ability to act in a manner which the people would disagree with, without having to face democratic consequences and accountability for such behaviour. Your own report cites a perfect example of this, the Anonymous attack on HBGary. Whether HBGary were acting in the cause of security or military gain is irrelevant - their actions were illegal and morally reprehensible. Anonymous does not accept that the government and/or the military has the right to be above the law and to use the phoney cliche of "national security" to justify illegal and deceptive activities. If the government must break the rules, they must also be willing to accept the democratic consequences of this at the ballot box.We do not accept the current status quo whereby a government can tell one story to the people and another in private. Dishonesty and secrecy totally undermine the concept of self rule. How can the people judge for whom to vote unless they are fully aware of what policies said politicians are actually pursuing?

When a government is elected, it is said to "represent" the nation it governs. This essentially means that the actions of a government are not the actions of the people in government, but are actions taken on behalf of every citizen in that country. It is unacceptable to have a situation in which the people are, in many cases, totally and utterly unaware of what is being said and done on their behalf - behind closed doors.

Anonymous and WikiLeaks are distinct entities. The actions of Anonymous were not aided or even requested by WikiLeaks. However, Anonymous and WikiLeaks do share one common attribute: They are no threat to any organization - unless that organization is doing something wrong and attempting to get away with it.

We do not wish to threaten anybody's way of life. We do not wish to dictate anything to anybody. We do not wish to terrorize any nation.

We merely wish to remove power from vested interests and return it to the people - who, in a democracy, it should never have been taken from in the first place.
The government makes the law. This does not give them the right to break it. If the government was doing nothing underhand or illegal, there would be nothing "embarassing" about Wikileaks revelations, nor would there have been any scandal emanating from HBGary. The resulting scandals were not a result of Anonymous' or Wikileaks' revelations, they were the result of the CONTENT of those revelations. And responsibility for that content can be laid solely at the doorstep of policymakers who, like any corrupt entity, naively believed that they were above the law and that they would not be caught.

A lot of government and corporate comment has been dedicated to "how we can avoid a similar leak in the future". Such advice ranges from better security, to lower levels of clearance, from harsher penalties for whistleblowers, to censorship of the press.

Our message is simple: Do not lie to the people and you won't have to worry about your lies being exposed. Do not make corrupt deals and you won't have to worry about your corruption being laid bare. Do not break the rules and you won't have to worry about getting in trouble for it.

Do not attempt to repair your two faces by concealing one of them. Instead, try having only one face - an honest, open and democratic one.

You know you do not fear us because we are a threat to society. You fear us because we are a threat to the established hierarchy. Anonymous has proven over the last several years that a hierarchy is not necessary in order to achieve great progress - perhaps what you truly fear in us, is the realization of your own irrelevance in an age which has outgrown its reliance on you. Your true terror is not in a collective of activists, but in the fact that you and everything you stand for have, by the changing tides and the advancement of technology, are now surplus to requirements.

Finally, do not make the mistake of challenging Anonymous. Do not make the mistake of believing you can behead a headless snake. If you slice off one head of Hydra, ten more heads will grow in its place. If you cut down one Anon, ten more will join us purely out of anger at your trampling of dissent.

Your only chance of defeating the movement which binds all of us is to accept it. This is no longer your world. It is our world - the people's world.

We are Anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us...

sorce: anonnews.yup.name...

It certainly is looking better, and making a better point as well.Although in the end, I think the absolute best would be to gather all evidence....and make it a court case? If it's that bad...hacking websites won't do much IMO

well mostly evrything of any importance is on a network any network has its flaws wich makes it exesseble to thoughs who know how to do it so if u take that into consideration hacking could be more powerfull then one would expect. sorry about the spelling

I don't know if I trust these online taliban. I really think it is the CIA masquerading as anon to try to garner supporters and then suddenly round them up at once. Don't trust these taliban, they don't have real hacking skills anyway.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
I don't know if I trust these online taliban. I really think it is the CIA masquerading as anon to try to garner supporters and then suddenly round them up at once. Don't trust these taliban, they don't have real hacking skills anyway.

yes it is quite odd, although if one were to follow that train of thought, then one could assume that this site serves the very same function. Anon is the front, it's attacks carried out by anyone, and supported by anyone willing,
eventually I envision this movement will move beyond cyber attacks and take physical form as the corruption becomes more evident.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Don't trust these taliban, they don't have real hacking skills anyway.

Calling Anon "the Taliban" is a precourser to calling anyone who protests against the government a 'terrorist'. So please be careful with your branding.

Also, you act as if you know a lot about the maw known as anonymous. You say "they have no hacking skills" yet they were able to break into many secure databases. Some anon members may be governmental code breakers themselves, there is no way of knowing. Anon is a worldwide movement, and do not believe for a second one generalization will cover them all.

reply to post by OptimusSubprime

Anon is retarded.

How eloquent, and very telling that you think acting against the global banking cartel is "retarded"

You probably should go back to playing Call of duty.

......baaa baa

anyone that has changed there oppinon on annonomys based on the whole sony thing is insane honestly do u care more about a game then real life wow just wow

Good points Anons.
Good luck.

"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."

Has anyone else noticed the increasing beating of the drum when it comes to Anon/ hacking? It seems the Internet is seething at any news about hacking.

I fully agree it's the 21st century bad man. I can only hope the last true guard steps up to the challenge to protect us from ourself.

Typical American sheep will most likely have some tragic event happen to them. Hacking of money markets, events similar to the flash crash of 2010. Losing massive about of money and value only held electronically your Bank's Database. Deleted Formatted Gone.

Then they will usher in the iPatriot Act. It's for your protection.

I didn't take the time to read all the post in this thread (working on 2nd bottle of pinot )

But I will say this.....earlier today people on this very site were saying how they did not trust the "Anonymous" network.......... and now "Anonymous" claims refute to NATO...interesting!!!

Either those on this site were completely wrong or, "Anonymous," a so called gov't entity is attempting to disprove our assumptions......

Don't be so easily persuaded...that is the way of the sheep not the WOLF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

how about anon do something useful, like hack c.i.a database and get proof of extraterrestrials, or military computers and get proof osama was killed.

instead they hack free online gaming services and credit card websites.

Again... going after anonymous? How ... HOW?? Anyone and no one can be anonymous.

reply to post by Skerrako

You say "they have no hacking skills" yet they were able to break into many secure databases

They do not have hacking skills in my opinion. Stealing keys and getting into a database is not the same as cracking the encryption of a database.

It is kin to me breaking into your house if you misplace your keys and making me out to be a genius. They really do not have the skills to crack AES-256 strength encryption. They can only get it if someone misplaces the key, so in my opinion they do not have skills. All they do is mount DOS/DDOS attacks. How come they cant get into googles servers?

You know why? Because google is much smarter and a larger company and anon's little kiddie script DDOS attacks wont work on such a large company because their servers are designed to handle the load. Not only that Google is incredibly secure and I have not heard of any anon being able to hack their way into google.

Conclusion: no skills, just kiddies/CIA who think they are all that.

I give anon a challenge to crack my file stored on a thumbdrive. I will even post it on a free rapidshare/megaupload service etc..If anon can crack my file and get the "classified data" then I will retract my statements.

Add: Also these people may have tried to put a computer virus on my computer for years but to no avail. Still Virus free after 4 years. These hackers are useless, and are not elite. Their are many more in the underground who could run circles around these wannabes. Also I am not a hacker and I do not know anything about hacking.

reply to post by OwenGP185


dude, only guys say bro