gizmodo.com— Anonymous' gutting of Puckett & Faraj, the firm that defended the Marines behind the Haditha Killing, might have been more than a major embarrassment.
Feb 6, 2012View in Crawl 4
If you remember, Anon are people who makes mistakes as well. But, if you recall, they have done more good than bad. You can be disappointed in some of their actions, but they (most of them) are doing what they do for the best. At least thats who I feel about it.
They answer to no one. Right now you like them because you support their actions. What will you do when they go after something you like? Who will you complain to? Anonymous is as bad as the people they claim to be taking down.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Right. Right now their intentions are good. What happens if that changes? Since they have no check to anything they do, that can turn at any time can't it? Are we just supposed to believe that at no point will they do something horrible? Have we not learned anything about human behavior?
So you want to convict on potential for evil, rather than convict those in power who have already proven themselves evil?
How very Republican. I've heard the same talking points on how carbon taxes COULD be used to form anbusive one-world government, while ignoring the status quo that is already killing the planet.
I posted this in the wrong reply (below), my bad for spamming some.
Well, you are only as good as the people you hang out with and I think the same statement is true for the people you look up too. If, by chance, one of those people where out of line and something of the nature needed to be done, then i could understand why. But, other than this rare instance, where else have they gone wrong? Ratio wise, are they doing more good than bad. The answer, if I'm a supporter of them or not, is they do more good.
Example: When the Egyptian government shut down the internet, they took action and got the word/info out to the world.
Same goes for the corrupt police (Wall Street, Arizona, Etc.), they are taking action (as every citizen should anyways, but don't) and make it publicly known that something is going to be done for it.
Releasing information on corporations who think they can do anything they want, release there info so people can take action.
Even more recently, they where a big factor of antisopa/pipa. Which, as we are able to do now, talk about freely, bc they and other groups/organizations pitched in and help.
But, you can let one bad egg ruin it for them all. The person who released this may have never had any form of associated with them anon before and decided to do this one gig and say he was with them.
Also, for the billionaires and big business, who do we turn to when they do something wrong?
Their intentions are mostly childish and badly aimed. They are only "good" to the extent that they believe themselves to be good but in anything like an objective sense, they do nothing but damage and benefit no one. How can that be good?
I've never known a child take down a huge international law firm, attack the FBI or a take down a police department. There actions are anything but childish. They are serious people doing serious things. Why must people seek to belittle what they don't understand?
How can that be good? They are standing up for what they believe in just like we were all taught to do and they aren't physically hurting anyone. Men with guns will hurt them one day because that's how our society reacts but for now, they are essentially the only watchdog with powers and nothing to gain but a long prison sentence (and maybe a movie deal).
I can't wait to see how history remembers these guys. It will either be as terrorists or hero's and I guess it just depends on who falls first.
The thing is, by the time they gain serious support it will be too late. Some hackers claiming to be them will commit a huge crime and because they have no leadership there will be no clear way for them to say "That wasn't us". At which point the public will really turn on them.
Oh and you say "badly aimed", I'm curious to know where you would like them to aim.
If a real Robin Hood were to suddenly appear and right wrongs, I think these same "law and order types" would want to hang him for breaking the law and then put a small metal on his corpse to commemorate his thoughtfulness towards the starving.
It's like the rhetoric against OWS; ignoring the vast crimes of Wall Street as they decried the hanging sin of littering a public park. But when the armored police shredded tents in the night-- the cleanliness of the park was forgotten.
Are we back to family-values again, Mr. Newt Gingrich?
Well, you are only as good as the people you hang out with and I think the same statement is true for the people you look up too. If, by chance, one of those people where out of line and something of the nature needed to be done, then i could understand why. But, other than this rare instance, where else have they gone wrong? Ratio wise, are they doing more good than bad. The answer, if I'm a supporter of them or not, is they do more good.
Example: When the Egyptian government shut down the internet, they took action and got the word/info out to the world.
Same goes for the corrupt police (Wall Street, Arizona, Etc.), they are taking action (as every citizen should anyways, but don't) and make it publicly known that something is going to be done for it.
Releasing information on corporations who think they can do anything they want, release there info so people can take action.
Even more recently, they where a big factor of antisopa/pipa. Which, as we are able to do now, talk about freely, bc they and other groups/organizations pitched in and help.
But, you can let one bad egg ruin it for them all. The person who released this may have never had any form of associated with them anon before and decided to do this one gig and say he was with them.
Our military and the corps shielded by our captive government answer to no one-- why vilify some small group for making the same sin we've allowed in the abusive oppressor?
It seems to me that some people really just object to the little guy fighting back.
Really? So the Marines didn't deserve a fair trial and due process? If they're guilty then they'll be found guilty and their reprsentation isn't on trial.
You also realize that John Adams (2nd POTUS if you're too undereducated on US History and the Constitution and the likes) defended the Soldiers of the Boston Massacre even though it went against the popular opinion. Even he believed they deserved a fair trial. Some of them got off, some didn't.
Invoking John Adams is a low blow....damn.
I'm going to digg you up for that, because it shows that your historical perspective, heart, soul, and logic are all clearly in the right place. I am proud of you as a human being for all of that...I hope you have many children and teach them that wisdom.
That said, Anonymous is fighting a bloodless war against many with much blood on their hands and an unquenchable thirst for power. While that is small potatoes when compared to the stakes Adams was dealing with at the time of the Boston Massacre, I still find their means and desired ends to be worthwhile. Not everyone can be Gandhi or even aspires to be. Not everyone has the strength or determination to win the righteous fight by taking blows and not giving any. I understand that and support those who rise up to their attackers....but I will always recognize that Gandhi's way is the best course of action. I just dont know if waiting for another Gandhi (or Adams) to come along is going to win the important battles of our day. Your response gave me more hope of that than I had when I woke up though. Bravo and thank you.
They deserved a fair trial, but they deserved a harsher punishment for that massacre. You've got Marines who murdered 24 unarmed civilians as "punishment" for an IED attack. Military forces are not judge, jury, and executioner and especially not to civilians.
So these Marines committed a VERY serious crime and got off with a slap on the wrist. Meanwhile Bradley Manning releases a few pieces of information (he murdered no one) and he's facing no less than a life sentence.
The hypocrisy of this legal system is an eye sore.
Unless you are willing to take up arms, and are able to convince enough other people to do so too, you're going to have to work within the system. Even if it's working to change that very system.
Well Anoynmous aren't taking up arms but they are still working to change the system.
It's not a one wave attack. Many different people are fighting for change in their own way. Be it the Occupy movement or Anonymous.
Truth is, you couldn't fight a western government with weapons. You'd be instantly branded a terrorist and killed. At least this way, they are doing it without physically hurting people.
Forgive my ignorance here, I have a genuine question. Wasn't that John Adams job as Commander and Chief to defend his army? Wouldn't his armed forces reflect upon him?
Meh, I'm fairly certain there's more to the story that I simply don't know about but as a parable,
I was once attacked by a bar maid. As a 6'1, 270lbs guy, I didn't react with force. I put a complaint in the next day. A week later I received a letter from the bars parent franchise company stating I was bared from their bar for life.
Basically they were forced to take the side of the barmaid because if they hadn't, I'd have been able to sue. I'm not saying that's the same for Adams (mainly because I know nothing of the situation you are talking about) but it would seem to me that if his armed forces were in need, it would be his job to defend them.
British soldiers were accused of firing on american civilians. Adams defended the British soldiers in US court.
This was obviously very unpopular, but he defended his actions with an adamant and educated argument about the need for everyone to be defended in order for the system to work.
That's incredible. A real life Atticus Finch. Thanks for answering my question.
I'm not saying these lawyers are 100% scum for defending war criminals, I just aren't a fan of money being an incentive of the legal system, especially when it comes to prosecution and defence. I mean it's one thing paying lawyers to sort a dispute between companies and to get legal contracts in place but to pay a firm huge amounts of money to go all out on your defence, implies that someone with less money would get less of a service. Money completely corrupts the legal system.
Then throw in the fact that these guys are specialists when it comes to defending war criminals - it just reeks of corruption.
Let me give a small example of what I mean.
A while ago I was in a car accident where a learner driver in her instructors car cut across the round about. The front of her smashed the back of my car and I went spinning into on coming traffic. I don't blame her, she was a learner driver, these things happen. I don't blame him either, it happened incredibly fast and there probably wasn't a great deal he could have done differently.
Fortunately, nobody was badly injured (though the dead arm and stiff neck weren't fun). Basically, the front of their car was destroyed and the rear of my car needed some body work and tracking. I got out of my car to see if they were alright. The first thing the driving instructor said to me was "I don't know who's fault that was mate". At which point, I knew he was going to try and lump me with a bill.
You see, he's a specialist driver and just like a specialist lawyer, he knows exactly what to say to get away with things. Had this been someone who'd never been in an accident, the first thing they would have said is "I'm really sorry are you ok". We're British, even if it was our fault, we'd still have said sorry because that's what we are like. But if he had said that, it would have been an admission of guilt and therefore he'd have been liable for all damages.
You see it was no longer about the facts, now it was about who can get away without paying. Well with lawyers like these, it's not about finding out the truth, it's about winning the case so they can keep their success rate up and keep attracting new business.
It's a huge flaw with the entire legal system. Hopefully one day it will be sorted out. In the mean time, Anonymous will go on fighting what appears to me,to be the good fight.
I would much rather see Anonymous focus their energies on regimes, dictators, and terrorists that are killing their people by the thousands and tens of thousands (Syria, Al-Qaida, Drug lords, etc). Wouldn’t it make more sense to focus on the most horrid acts of humanity and human rights violators?
I am not saying what these marines did was right, but our world is going down hill fast and there are bigger fish to fry.
They are focusing a lot of their energies on regimes, dictators and terrorist that have killed in the tens and hundreds of thousands. The US government, the UK government, etc.
You and I both know they were only on trial for show.....they NEVER would of been held accountable for what they did. None of them are except for Bradley Manning which will most likely be in prison for the rest of his life for being a whistle blower........where is the justice?
These soldiers should of been given over to the victims families if they left any alive that is...YOU DONT KILL INNOCENTS without expecting retribution.
I'm not disagreeing that the whole thing was a sham, but that's not the law firm's fault. The system is seriously flawed, no doubt, but you don't f**king attack the law firm simply for doing their job. Since when do we say that certain people don't have a right to defend themselves?
I seem to remember certain nazis saying the same thing...I was just doing my job, doing what I was told. Lawyers who defend people who are 100% guilty of raping and killing a child are just as bad as the sicko who did the deed....but wait they are just doing their job......
No, I do not know that and neither do you. You have no idea whatsoever what evidence and mitigating factors were presented in the case. You are making a conclusion based on nothing but ignorance.
Anonymous is the real-life embodiment of every evil organization ever. A shadowy stateless criminal enterprise headed by unknown, often masked, leaders and engaged in active sabotage of US interests using foreign and domestic agents.
captswuitsFeb 7, 2012
If you remember, Anon are people who makes mistakes as well. But, if you recall, they have done more good than bad. You can be disappointed in some of their actions, but they (most of them) are doing what they do for the best. At least thats who I feel about it.
crashdvisFeb 7, 2012
They answer to no one. Right now you like them because you support their actions. What will you do when they go after something you like? Who will you complain to? Anonymous is as bad as the people they claim to be taking down.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
quisquisFeb 7, 2012
If I had to classify them, I would say they are "chaotic good".
Their intentions are almost always good, but their tactics and strategy are questionable.
crashdvisFeb 7, 2012
Right. Right now their intentions are good. What happens if that changes? Since they have no check to anything they do, that can turn at any time can't it? Are we just supposed to believe that at no point will they do something horrible? Have we not learned anything about human behavior?
vitriolandangstFeb 7, 2012
So you want to convict on potential for evil, rather than convict those in power who have already proven themselves evil?
How very Republican. I've heard the same talking points on how carbon taxes COULD be used to form anbusive one-world government, while ignoring the status quo that is already killing the planet.
captswuitsFeb 7, 2012
I posted this in the wrong reply (below), my bad for spamming some.
Well, you are only as good as the people you hang out with and I think the same statement is true for the people you look up too. If, by chance, one of those people where out of line and something of the nature needed to be done, then i could understand why. But, other than this rare instance, where else have they gone wrong? Ratio wise, are they doing more good than bad. The answer, if I'm a supporter of them or not, is they do more good.
Example: When the Egyptian government shut down the internet, they took action and got the word/info out to the world.
Same goes for the corrupt police (Wall Street, Arizona, Etc.), they are taking action (as every citizen should anyways, but don't) and make it publicly known that something is going to be done for it.
Releasing information on corporations who think they can do anything they want, release there info so people can take action.
Even more recently, they where a big factor of antisopa/pipa. Which, as we are able to do now, talk about freely, bc they and other groups/organizations pitched in and help.
But, you can let one bad egg ruin it for them all. The person who released this may have never had any form of associated with them anon before and decided to do this one gig and say he was with them.
Also, for the billionaires and big business, who do we turn to when they do something wrong?
whiteravenFeb 7, 2012
Their intentions are mostly childish and badly aimed. They are only "good" to the extent that they believe themselves to be good but in anything like an objective sense, they do nothing but damage and benefit no one. How can that be good?
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
I've never known a child take down a huge international law firm, attack the FBI or a take down a police department. There actions are anything but childish. They are serious people doing serious things. Why must people seek to belittle what they don't understand?
How can that be good? They are standing up for what they believe in just like we were all taught to do and they aren't physically hurting anyone. Men with guns will hurt them one day because that's how our society reacts but for now, they are essentially the only watchdog with powers and nothing to gain but a long prison sentence (and maybe a movie deal).
I can't wait to see how history remembers these guys. It will either be as terrorists or hero's and I guess it just depends on who falls first.
The thing is, by the time they gain serious support it will be too late. Some hackers claiming to be them will commit a huge crime and because they have no leadership there will be no clear way for them to say "That wasn't us". At which point the public will really turn on them.
Oh and you say "badly aimed", I'm curious to know where you would like them to aim.
aristotle0dudeFeb 7, 2012
There is no such thing as "chaotic good" in the real world. That is why society arrest any vigilante they can find.
Life is not a "batman" comic book.
The road to hell is often paved with good intentions.
sephickFeb 7, 2012
There's a road to hell? I just thought it was a state of mind... What's the speed limit?
autokadFeb 7, 2012
66.6kmph, yeah hell uses the metric system...
sephickFeb 7, 2012
you mean DOESN'T use the metric system... ;)
sephickFeb 7, 2012
Oh no! I can't delete my comment! I just noticed the k!... and yeah, if hell existed, they would use the imperial system...
vitriolandangstFeb 7, 2012
If a real Robin Hood were to suddenly appear and right wrongs, I think these same "law and order types" would want to hang him for breaking the law and then put a small metal on his corpse to commemorate his thoughtfulness towards the starving.
It's like the rhetoric against OWS; ignoring the vast crimes of Wall Street as they decried the hanging sin of littering a public park. But when the armored police shredded tents in the night-- the cleanliness of the park was forgotten.
Are we back to family-values again, Mr. Newt Gingrich?
captswuitsFeb 7, 2012
Well, you are only as good as the people you hang out with and I think the same statement is true for the people you look up too. If, by chance, one of those people where out of line and something of the nature needed to be done, then i could understand why. But, other than this rare instance, where else have they gone wrong? Ratio wise, are they doing more good than bad. The answer, if I'm a supporter of them or not, is they do more good.
Example: When the Egyptian government shut down the internet, they took action and got the word/info out to the world.
Same goes for the corrupt police (Wall Street, Arizona, Etc.), they are taking action (as every citizen should anyways, but don't) and make it publicly known that something is going to be done for it.
Releasing information on corporations who think they can do anything they want, release there info so people can take action.
Even more recently, they where a big factor of antisopa/pipa. Which, as we are able to do now, talk about freely, bc they and other groups/organizations pitched in and help.
But, you can let one bad egg ruin it for them all. The person who released this may have never had any form of associated with them anon before and decided to do this one gig and say he was with them.
vitriolandangstFeb 7, 2012
Our military and the corps shielded by our captive government answer to no one-- why vilify some small group for making the same sin we've allowed in the abusive oppressor?
It seems to me that some people really just object to the little guy fighting back.
whiteravenFeb 7, 2012
For it to be true that they have done more good than bad, they would logically have had to have done some good.
I can't think of any.
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
I think we've already established that you can't think at all.
Mark_LincolnFeb 6, 2012
If Anonymous has destroyed Puckett & Faraj then it has done something wonderful.
mbreezyFeb 7, 2012
Really? So the Marines didn't deserve a fair trial and due process? If they're guilty then they'll be found guilty and their reprsentation isn't on trial.
You also realize that John Adams (2nd POTUS if you're too undereducated on US History and the Constitution and the likes) defended the Soldiers of the Boston Massacre even though it went against the popular opinion. Even he believed they deserved a fair trial. Some of them got off, some didn't.
igorunchainedFeb 7, 2012
Invoking John Adams is a low blow....damn.
I'm going to digg you up for that, because it shows that your historical perspective, heart, soul, and logic are all clearly in the right place. I am proud of you as a human being for all of that...I hope you have many children and teach them that wisdom.
That said, Anonymous is fighting a bloodless war against many with much blood on their hands and an unquenchable thirst for power. While that is small potatoes when compared to the stakes Adams was dealing with at the time of the Boston Massacre, I still find their means and desired ends to be worthwhile. Not everyone can be Gandhi or even aspires to be. Not everyone has the strength or determination to win the righteous fight by taking blows and not giving any. I understand that and support those who rise up to their attackers....but I will always recognize that Gandhi's way is the best course of action. I just dont know if waiting for another Gandhi (or Adams) to come along is going to win the important battles of our day. Your response gave me more hope of that than I had when I woke up though. Bravo and thank you.
quisquisFeb 7, 2012
We're out here.
mbreezy pretty much took the words right out of my mouth.
Closed AccountFeb 7, 2012
They are not defending the Marines out the goodness of their hearts. They get paid. A lot. They're mercenaries. Adios, law firm. no love lost.
quisquisFeb 8, 2012
Paid or not, they are serving a crucial role in society.
mlw4428Feb 7, 2012
They deserved a fair trial, but they deserved a harsher punishment for that massacre. You've got Marines who murdered 24 unarmed civilians as "punishment" for an IED attack. Military forces are not judge, jury, and executioner and especially not to civilians.
So these Marines committed a VERY serious crime and got off with a slap on the wrist. Meanwhile Bradley Manning releases a few pieces of information (he murdered no one) and he's facing no less than a life sentence.
The hypocrisy of this legal system is an eye sore.
hillsfarFeb 7, 2012
They admitted killing these civilians who were innocent. They got 3 months in jail. How fair a justice system is that?
jibbityjabFeb 7, 2012
They got NO jail time.
betacmag4uFeb 7, 2012
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
quisquisFeb 7, 2012
He's not referencing patriotism dude...
He's referring to the fact that you shouldn't lynch the representation for doing their job, and doing it to the best ability they can.
The law only works when all the parts work, and if there's no one defending the accused, then it's not a fair trial.
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
If there's nobody representing the poor then the rich will make the laws. That's what has happened. That is still what is happening today.
THE LAW DOESN'T WORK.
People get life in prison for sharing computer files where as people who commit murder get a few years or worse, nothing.
What good is a the letter of LAW if the KKK are the ones who wrote it?
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
"What good is a the letter of LAW to a black man if the KKK are the ones who wrote it?"
Was what I was aiming for.
quisquisFeb 8, 2012
Unless you are willing to take up arms, and are able to convince enough other people to do so too, you're going to have to work within the system. Even if it's working to change that very system.
dandoniaFeb 8, 2012
Well Anoynmous aren't taking up arms but they are still working to change the system.
It's not a one wave attack. Many different people are fighting for change in their own way. Be it the Occupy movement or Anonymous.
Truth is, you couldn't fight a western government with weapons. You'd be instantly branded a terrorist and killed. At least this way, they are doing it without physically hurting people.
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
Erm...
Forgive my ignorance here, I have a genuine question. Wasn't that John Adams job as Commander and Chief to defend his army? Wouldn't his armed forces reflect upon him?
Meh, I'm fairly certain there's more to the story that I simply don't know about but as a parable,
I was once attacked by a bar maid. As a 6'1, 270lbs guy, I didn't react with force. I put a complaint in the next day. A week later I received a letter from the bars parent franchise company stating I was bared from their bar for life.
Basically they were forced to take the side of the barmaid because if they hadn't, I'd have been able to sue. I'm not saying that's the same for Adams (mainly because I know nothing of the situation you are talking about) but it would seem to me that if his armed forces were in need, it would be his job to defend them.
quisquisFeb 8, 2012
British soldiers were accused of firing on american civilians. Adams defended the British soldiers in US court.
This was obviously very unpopular, but he defended his actions with an adamant and educated argument about the need for everyone to be defended in order for the system to work.
These events occurred prior to his presidency.
dandoniaFeb 8, 2012
That's incredible. A real life Atticus Finch. Thanks for answering my question.
I'm not saying these lawyers are 100% scum for defending war criminals, I just aren't a fan of money being an incentive of the legal system, especially when it comes to prosecution and defence. I mean it's one thing paying lawyers to sort a dispute between companies and to get legal contracts in place but to pay a firm huge amounts of money to go all out on your defence, implies that someone with less money would get less of a service. Money completely corrupts the legal system.
Then throw in the fact that these guys are specialists when it comes to defending war criminals - it just reeks of corruption.
Let me give a small example of what I mean.
A while ago I was in a car accident where a learner driver in her instructors car cut across the round about. The front of her smashed the back of my car and I went spinning into on coming traffic. I don't blame her, she was a learner driver, these things happen. I don't blame him either, it happened incredibly fast and there probably wasn't a great deal he could have done differently.
Fortunately, nobody was badly injured (though the dead arm and stiff neck weren't fun). Basically, the front of their car was destroyed and the rear of my car needed some body work and tracking. I got out of my car to see if they were alright. The first thing the driving instructor said to me was "I don't know who's fault that was mate". At which point, I knew he was going to try and lump me with a bill.
You see, he's a specialist driver and just like a specialist lawyer, he knows exactly what to say to get away with things. Had this been someone who'd never been in an accident, the first thing they would have said is "I'm really sorry are you ok". We're British, even if it was our fault, we'd still have said sorry because that's what we are like. But if he had said that, it would have been an admission of guilt and therefore he'd have been liable for all damages.
You see it was no longer about the facts, now it was about who can get away without paying. Well with lawyers like these, it's not about finding out the truth, it's about winning the case so they can keep their success rate up and keep attracting new business.
It's a huge flaw with the entire legal system. Hopefully one day it will be sorted out. In the mean time, Anonymous will go on fighting what appears to me,to be the good fight.
sapperliteFeb 7, 2012
I would much rather see Anonymous focus their energies on regimes, dictators, and terrorists that are killing their people by the thousands and tens of thousands (Syria, Al-Qaida, Drug lords, etc). Wouldn’t it make more sense to focus on the most horrid acts of humanity and human rights violators?
I am not saying what these marines did was right, but our world is going down hill fast and there are bigger fish to fry.
dandoniaFeb 7, 2012
While we all want those regimes to fall, not every issue can be attacked online.
kanzanFeb 9, 2012
They are focusing a lot of their energies on regimes, dictators and terrorist that have killed in the tens and hundreds of thousands. The US government, the UK government, etc.
schmonsFeb 7, 2012
HAHA Like I feel bad for some lawyers.
mandrakelordFeb 7, 2012
Good job!
We are winning ;)
zipkoFeb 7, 2012
Thank you Anonymous for s**tting on the constitution and protesting everyone's right to a fair trial
/s
omnikundunFeb 7, 2012
You and I both know they were only on trial for show.....they NEVER would of been held accountable for what they did. None of them are except for Bradley Manning which will most likely be in prison for the rest of his life for being a whistle blower........where is the justice?
These soldiers should of been given over to the victims families if they left any alive that is...YOU DONT KILL INNOCENTS without expecting retribution.
leodinFeb 7, 2012
I'm not disagreeing that the whole thing was a sham, but that's not the law firm's fault. The system is seriously flawed, no doubt, but you don't f**king attack the law firm simply for doing their job. Since when do we say that certain people don't have a right to defend themselves?
omnikundunMar 2, 2012
I seem to remember certain nazis saying the same thing...I was just doing my job, doing what I was told. Lawyers who defend people who are 100% guilty of raping and killing a child are just as bad as the sicko who did the deed....but wait they are just doing their job......
whiteravenFeb 7, 2012
No, I do not know that and neither do you. You have no idea whatsoever what evidence and mitigating factors were presented in the case. You are making a conclusion based on nothing but ignorance.
omnikundunFeb 7, 2012
All was posted online fool.....for anyone to read. Did you?
vitriolandangstFeb 7, 2012
These soldiers were in about as much trouble as a Blackwater rapist ... None whatsoever.
austrologiFeb 7, 2012
Still, how is it the law firms fault? What gives anonymous the right?
Just like the marines had no right to be judge, jury, and executioner, neither does anonymous. It's hypocritical to say the least.
autokadFeb 7, 2012
bradley manning is hardly a 'whistle blower'.
soundsofsublimeFeb 7, 2012
heh
vitriolandangstFeb 7, 2012
How can THE TRUTH destroy anything of value?
Closed AccountFeb 7, 2012
another anon screw up. the lower down guys pay for the higher ups mistakes. thses guys are idiots. go after the MF that issued the orders.
mandrakelordFeb 7, 2012
"Go for" All who conspire, higher ups or lower levels.
genaamFeb 7, 2012
Syrian President’s Email hacked by Anonymous. The Password wasn’t too hard to get:12345 http://myproffs.co.uk/index.php/home/1694-syrian-presidents-email-hacked-by-anonymous-the-password-wasnt-too-hard-to-get12345
aristotle0dudeFeb 7, 2012
Weird Al
Miley Cyrus
Anonymous
Party
What is the connection?
MadocComadrinFeb 7, 2012
If you take all of the capital letters, it spells WAMCAP! That sounds like a killer nerf gun or some such.
carshybridFeb 7, 2012
go ahead hackers!
odkinFeb 7, 2012
Anonymous
HYDRA
COBRA
THRUSH
SPECTRE
KAOS
Anonymous is the real-life embodiment of every evil organization ever. A shadowy stateless criminal enterprise headed by unknown, often masked, leaders and engaged in active sabotage of US interests using foreign and domestic agents.
I'd say a little covert action is highly warranted right now.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
caseycooldFeb 7, 2012
You really just are so clueless it hurts...