[DrCaleb]

RUEZ RUEZ:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

RUEZ RUEZ:

But when it came time, they backed down against taking on real criminals. Nice hero's you have.

I thought you said they were Hackers? Isn't that the job of 'Federales'?

Nice wide brush you have there.

OK Caleb what's the hackers "job" then? macguyver said only criminals should fear them but we all know they back down to real criminals.

Who is 'they'? The people who gathered info about the gangs probabally aren't the same people you are talking about.

$1:

Beginning with 2008, the Anonymous collective has become increasingly associated with collaborative, international hacktivism, undertaking protests and other actions, often in retaliation against anti-digital piracy campaigns by motion picture and recording industry trade associations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)

They do not back down to the people they target, who are responsible for lobbying the US government into taking away rights and freedomes in the name of profit.

$1:

The hacktavist collective Anonymous has cancelled Operation Cartel after a member that was allegedly abducted by a Mexican drug cartel was released Thursday, the group's longtime public face announced in an online post.

$1:

However, after the unidentified member reportedly had been freed, Brown claimed that the e-mails would be handed over to him instead and the hackers would back down.

"Anything that proceeds from now on is my own work, and not that of Anonymous," he wrote.

Brown later added that the names of the alleged accomplices would not be released.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-11 ... line-video

So, Anon gets dirt on a Cartel to free a supporter, then gives the evidence to a lawyer, and they 'backed down'? Is it not the job now of the lawyer to proceed? (assuming of course, the lawyer is also not part of Anonymous).

To me (and I assume Maguyver), content companies that supress rights of people under the guise of 'profit' are the real criminals. The Cartels are as well, just they are more open and honest about their crime.

[bootlegga]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

So, Anon gets dirt on a Cartel to free a supporter, then gives the evidence to a lawyer, and they 'backed down'? Is it not the job now of the lawyer to proceed? (assuming of course, the lawyer is also not part of Anonymous).

To me (and I assume Maguyver), content companies that supress rights of people under the guise of 'profit' are the real criminals. The Cartels are as well, just they are more open and honest about their crime.

+5

[Smacle]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

$1:

However, after the unidentified member reportedly had been freed, Brown claimed that the e-mails would be handed over to him instead and the hackers would back down.

"Anything that proceeds from now on is my own work, and not that of Anonymous," he wrote.

Brown later added that the names of the alleged accomplices would not be released.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-11 ... line-video

So, Anon gets dirt on a Cartel to free a supporter, then gives the evidence to a lawyer, and they 'backed down'? Is it not the job now of the lawyer to proceed? (assuming of course, the lawyer is also not part of Anonymous).

$1:

"As the Zetas left a note with the person threatening to kill ten civilians for every name published, none of us will be proceeding with those particular names."...

Brown, who has spoken on behalf of Anonymous in the past...

Now Brown said he would be going after other cartels...

From the same article.

Anonymous didn't release the names, they stopped going after that particular cartel, this resulted in no arrests.

The Zetas are unhindered, no longer under attack from Anonymous, and proved that anonymous has no power to act alone to prevent the death or injury of anyone.

I'd call that backing down. Leave the policing to the authorities, amateurs.

[DrCaleb]

Smacle Smacle:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

$1:

However, after the unidentified member reportedly had been freed, Brown claimed that the e-mails would be handed over to him instead and the hackers would back down.

"Anything that proceeds from now on is my own work, and not that of Anonymous," he wrote.

Brown later added that the names of the alleged accomplices would not be released.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-11 ... line-video

So, Anon gets dirt on a Cartel to free a supporter, then gives the evidence to a lawyer, and they 'backed down'? Is it not the job now of the lawyer to proceed? (assuming of course, the lawyer is also not part of Anonymous).

$1:

"As the Zetas left a note with the person threatening to kill ten civilians for every name published, none of us will be proceeding with those particular names."...

Brown, who has spoken on behalf of Anonymous in the past...

Now Brown said he would be going after other cartels...

From the same article.

Anonymous didn't release the names, they stopped going after that particular cartel, this resulted in no arrests.

The Zetas are unhindered, no longer under attack from Anonymous, and proved that anonymous has no power to act alone to prevent the death or injury of anyone.

I'd call that backing down. Leave the policing to the authorities, amateurs.

Because the Police were able to come up with all that evidence against the Cartel. I don't get people sometimes. Hacking into unsecured systems and causing mayhem that hurts no one - bad. Not releasing the names of 75 people that would result in the death of at least 750 people - also bad, and cowardly.

[peck420]

Wow, is Toews really shocked that public knowledge of his personal life became...public?

Really?

You gotta be some kind of stupid to think that, as a politician, the glare of the public spotlight will not shine on you.

I don't even see how this could be illegal?

[Smacle]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Because the Police were able to come up with all that evidence against the Cartel.

Police know that without following proper procedures any info gathered in that manner would be inadmissible in court. Anonymous doesn't have some kind of jedi computer skills, police are able to hack just as well as anyone. It's finding evidence that can actually be used to arrest someone for more than a few months that is difficult to do.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I don't get people sometimes. Hacking into unsecured systems and causing mayhem that hurts no one - bad.

It hurts the legitimate businesses and their incomes.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Not releasing the names of 75 people that would result in the death of at least 750 people - also bad, and cowardly.

Bad. The 750 people that they put into danger to begin with because of their reckless vigilantism.

Cowardly. The fact that they are unwilling to use their vigilante self-righteousness to do anything productive like say launching a daring raid to rescue their friend, or giving a target for the cartel to attack in order to divert attention from the civilians at their own personal risk, or patrol the streets and enforce the morals and values that are most commonly shard among your society, you know like what the police and military do ("supposed to do" in mexico's case).

Considering the daunting task that Anonymous volunteered to take on, I'd say that how they handled it makes them cowardly and dangerous.

[DrCaleb]

Smacle Smacle:

Bad. The 750 people that they put into danger to begin with because of their reckless vigilantism.

Cowardly. The fact that they are unwilling to use their vigilante self-righteousness to do anything productive like say launching a daring raid to rescue their friend, or giving a target for the cartel to attack in order to divert attention from the civilians at their own personal risk, or patrol the streets and enforce the morals and values that are most commonly shard among your society, you know like what the police and military do ("supposed to do" in mexico's case).

Considering the daunting task that Anonymous volunteered to take on, I'd say that how they handled it makes them cowardly and dangerous.

They put no one at risk, because they did not release the names.

So, they are taking a stand on corpratism of politics, and supression of rights; but if they don't use their vast geek-fu to do the incompetent Mexican authorities jobs, they are 'cowardly'? How does that make sense? Were they to blind the drug dealers with their pasty white skin?

0:

virgin-4-life-5.jpg [ 28.03 KiB | Viewed 179 times ]

The job that they took on, they seem to be doing very well. The job that got thrust upon them, they handled with as much poise as could be expected. I certainally couldn't release names knowing 700+ lives would be on my concious.

[Dragon-Dancer]

Smacle Smacle:

Cowardly. The fact that they are unwilling to use their vigilante self-righteousness to do anything productive like say launching a daring raid to rescue their friend, or giving a target for the cartel to attack in order to divert attention from the civilians at their own personal risk, or patrol the streets and enforce the morals and values that are most commonly shard among your society, you know like what the police and military do ("supposed to do" in mexico's case).

Considering the daunting task that Anonymous volunteered to take on, I'd say that how they handled it makes them cowardly and dangerous.

You combat it by making yourself a target if you want but it isn't any less courageous to contribute in ways more attuned with your own skills. Not everyone is a meat shield (target dummy) of the type you seem to respect. Generally I say it's smarter to /not/ make yourself a direct target in the process and yet feed info to those who can take care of things on the ground.

[jeff744]

Smacle Smacle:

Cowardly. The fact that they are unwilling to use their vigilante self-righteousness to do anything productive like say launching a daring raid to rescue their friend, or giving a target for the cartel to attack in order to divert attention from the civilians at their own personal risk, or patrol the streets and enforce the morals and values that are most commonly shard among your society, you know like what the police and military do ("supposed to do" in mexico's case).

Considering the daunting task that Anonymous volunteered to take on, I'd say that how they handled it makes them cowardly and dangerous.

So the bank clerk that hits the silent alarm is a coward because they don't recklessly charge the man with the gun instead of choosing to leave it to people wearing body armour and carrying guns?

How about the guy that calls 911 when they see a house fire instead of running into the inferno personally to make sure nobody is inside instead of waiting for the guys trained specifically to deal with it?

This is even more hilarious when you consider that you are full of comments like this but have done nothing to make Anon do this kind of stuff, I guess you're a coward too.

[Smacle]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

They put no one at risk, because they did not release the names.

The risk is still present. What if they change their minds and release the names? What if the Zetas decide that not releasing the names isn't enough? The risk wouldn't be there if Anonymous didn't hide behind their computers. The cartel would attack them directly instead of involving civilians in the first place.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

So, they are taking a stand on corpratism of politics, and supression of rights; but if they don't use their vast geek-fu to do the incompetent Mexican authorities jobs, they are 'cowardly'? How does that make sense? Were they to blind the drug dealers with their pasty white skin?

They are cowardly because they volunteered to do a job and then backed down from accomplishing any of their objectives as soon as someone could get hurt. The authorities put themselves in the open so that these thugs target them instead of innocent civilians.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The job that they took on, they seem to be doing very well. The job that got thrust upon them, they handled with as much poise as could be expected. I certainally couldn't release names knowing 700+ lives would be on my concious.

They didn't have any job thrust upon them, they went looking for trouble and they found it then ran like the little geeky virgins they are. That's why Anonymous has no place interfering with any law enforcement operations, leave it to the professionals.

Dragon-Dancer Dragon-Dancer:

You combat it by making yourself a target if you want but it isn't any less courageous to contribute in ways more attuned with your own skills. Not everyone is a meat shield (target dummy) of the type you seem to respect. Generally I say it's smarter to /not/ make yourself a direct target in the process and yet feed info to those who can take care of things on the ground.

The name Anonymous itself lacks any valor. They let other people protest, they let civilians become threatened because of their actions, the fact that they will not reveal their identities proves that they are cowards. Writing a blog anonymously doesn't take any courage at all.

It takes real dedication and aggressive tactics to combat crime. Anonymous is ignorant to the consequences of their actions, The Zeta cartel proved that. Anonymous is naive enough to think it can continue to combat other cartels successfully. Once again, just leave it to the professionals.

[Smacle]

jeff744 jeff744:

So the bank clerk that hits the silent alarm is a coward because they don't recklessly charge the man with the gun instead of choosing to leave it to people wearing body armour and carrying guns?

How about the guy that calls 911 when they see a house fire instead of running into the inferno personally to make sure nobody is inside instead of waiting for the guys trained specifically to deal with it?

Neither of those are comparable situations.

jeff744 jeff744:

This is even more hilarious when you consider that you are full of comments like this but have done nothing to make Anon do this kind of stuff, I guess you're a coward too.

Why would I make Anon do anything? I don't get that part of your comment, "have done nothing to make Anon do this kind of stuff."

Your ignorance is dumbfounding and my courage is not the topic.

[jeff744]

Smacle Smacle:

jeff744 jeff744:

So the bank clerk that hits the silent alarm is a coward because they don't recklessly charge the man with the gun instead of choosing to leave it to people wearing body armour and carrying guns?

How about the guy that calls 911 when they see a house fire instead of running into the inferno personally to make sure nobody is inside instead of waiting for the guys trained specifically to deal with it?

Neither of those are comparable situations.

jeff744 jeff744:

This is even more hilarious when you consider that you are full of comments like this but have done nothing to make Anon do this kind of stuff, I guess you're a coward too.

Why would I make Anon do anything? I don't get that part of your comment, "have done nothing to make Anon do this kind of stuff."

Your ignorance is dumbfounding and my courage is not the topic.

They are completely relevant. Anon has done their jobs, they got their guy back and now any action rests on the lawyer. You wanted them out policing the streets, they are internet users good at finding information, not training for when bullets start flying at you. You want them to "launch a daring raid to rescue their friend," they are not paid to do any of this, the fact they threatened the cartel is more than most people would do, had they launched the raid they would have died because they don't own the small army worth of firearms that the cartels do.

[DrCaleb]

Smacle Smacle:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

They put no one at risk, because they did not release the names.

The risk is still present. What if they change their minds and release the names? What if the Zetas decide that not releasing the names isn't enough? The risk wouldn't be there if Anonymous didn't hide behind their computers. The cartel would attack them directly instead of involving civilians in the first place.

So, it's the entire situation you don't grasp. Ok.

There is no risk people won't be killed in Mexico by drug cartels? That's good news! (That Anon is involved makes no diference there)

And as the others point out, sending geeks against Drug lords is a little like lions vs. Christians. So they used the medium they are good at - the internet. Guess that isn't 'sexy' enough for you. After all, a tax accountant took down Al Capone, not a SWAT team.

Smacle Smacle:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

So, they are taking a stand on corpratism of politics, and supression of rights; but if they don't use their vast geek-fu to do the incompetent Mexican authorities jobs, they are 'cowardly'? How does that make sense? Were they to blind the drug dealers with their pasty white skin?

They are cowardly because they volunteered to do a job and then backed down from accomplishing any of their objectives as soon as someone could get hurt. The authorities put themselves in the open so that these thugs target them instead of innocent civilians.

They volunteered to expose corporate lobbying in the name of corporate profit, at the expese of people's rights. Given the track record, it was reasonable to assume the authorities that weren't already on the Cartel payroll were not in a position to do SFA. 'Authorities' that put them selves in harms way don't last long in Mexico. You can Google some nasty pictures if you like.

Smacle Smacle:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The job that they took on, they seem to be doing very well. The job that got thrust upon them, they handled with as much poise as could be expected. I certainally couldn't release names knowing 700+ lives would be on my concious.

They didn't have any job thrust upon them, they went looking for trouble and they found it then ran like the little geeky virgins they are. That's why Anonymous has no place interfering with any law enforcement operations, leave it to the professionals.

They did not volunteer to have one of their supporters kidnapped by Mexican Drug lords. They did take action, the only way then could, using their own professional skills. And they won.

[Smacle]

jeff744 jeff744:

They are completely relevant.

Totally off topic. We're talking about a bunch of guys surfing the internet and making you tube videos, not guys running into a burning building.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

They did not volunteer to have one of their supporters kidnapped by Mexican Drug lords. They did take action, the only way then could, using their own professional skills. And they won.

jeff744 jeff744:

Anon has done their jobs, they got their guy back and now any action rests on the lawyer.

Getting their guy back wasn't their job. Anonymous began speaking out against the cartels before this happened and even in the article which started this debate they claim that they will continue to "go after other cartels".

jeff744 jeff744:

You wanted them out policing the streets, they are internet users good at finding information, not training for when bullets start flying at you. You want them to "launch a daring raid to rescue their friend," they are not paid to do any of this, the fact they threatened the cartel is more than most people would do, had they launched the raid they would have died because they don't own the small army worth of firearms that the cartels do.

I don't want Anonymous doing anything at all. They should stick to gathering information and leave the law enforcement alone. If they want to help then maybe joining the police cyber units would be a more effective use of their skills.

[DrCaleb]

Smacle Smacle:

jeff744 jeff744:

They are completely relevant.

Totally off topic. We're talking about a bunch of guys surfing the internet and making you tube videos, not guys running into a burning building..

Like I said, you don't understand the problem. If you wanted to find groups of people trading kiddie porn between themselves, would you look in a burning building?

Smacle Smacle:

I don't want Anonymous doing anything at all. They should stick to gathering information and leave the law enforcement alone. If they want to help then maybe joining the police cyber units would be a more effective use of their skills.

Luckily, you are not the decider. They do what they want, they leave me alone. That's all I want. In fact, that all I ever want. But if I suddenly can't watch the movie I bought or listen to tthe CD I've had for years, I'm glad someone is out there keeping corporations at least a bit honest.

Just like this Towes fellow. Why does he want to read my email? Well, Anon shut him down by showing him what he was wanting to do to the rest of us. Good on them.

And, how do you know some of them are not already on police cyber units? I'd lay good odds that many of them are.