Anonymous Members Arrested for Performing DDOS Attacks

[sahwar]

[...]

Known by who? it is a mistake to make bold statements about a topic you clearly know very little about. Cyber-terrorism is terrorism it gets a "cyber" prefix because of the methods used, in this is is alone, you don't get "bullet-terrorism" or "explosives-terrorism".

The vast majority of critical national infrastructure is networked, mostly on isolated and very well secured networks but it is still possible to control remotely. Now a malicious party with the ability to turn off any utility at will can cause incalculable harm and if they can stop information flowing out from people responsible for damage control you have widespread panic and fear. This is the point of terrorism.

If you don't think it will cause no physical harm try looking up crime figures for a blackout. See what people do when the food can't be imported or refrigerated. See how many ICU's can function once the generators run out. We are three meals away from anarchy, remember that.

Also:

1. What do you think the government gains by capping your internet connection?

2. When have you (or anyone you know) ever been a victim of internet censorship? you've read a buttload of scare-scaremongering media drivel about how you are watched at all times but in reality the only people who care what you do online are the folks who want to sell you something.

3. The Police arrested the anon chumps in the UK because they breached the Computer Misuse Act. Detecting them is a simple as pulling the logs from a DDOS'd server, running a whois and getting the ISP to release the details of the users with a RIPA request. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REDUCING CYBER-TERRORISM. It's a simple breach of the law, 100's of similar arrests happen every week, you only read about this because it was related to Operation Avenge Assange.

How is this fighting fire with fire? Also you can fight a forest fire with a firebreak (natch).

4. They really aren't wasting almost all there resources, terrorism has a cyber element, counter-terrorism has a cyber element.

5. You are not oppressed. You are not being monitored by the Government. You can post whatever the hell you like on the internet and if you were really in a dystopia you wouldn't see ten thousand rednecks asking to see Obama's passport now would you?

And finally, you want us all to be equal and therefore there would be no reason for crime? Marxism as a thought experiment is a beautiful, beautiful way to live but it just doesn't scale to a whole country. Unless of course you have a a government with total power over every last resource and service...................... I don't think you'd like that now would you?

You know, it's not like some of your arguments aren't right in some of their points, it's that they aren't 100% correct either (nor are mine for that matter, but bear with me).

1. They help the governmental propaganda flourish as opposed to the citizen-driven free speech.

2. I've been and it's not as simple as you describe it.

3. Just because people believe in the (flawed idealized) supremacy of laws doesn't change the fact that almost 85% of all laws are actually ways for the mafia (i.e. Big Business) and their power elite (i.e. puppet governments) to forever enslave your body, mind and that of your children and all the next generations.

This is done by indoctrination and tunnel thinking by embedding into your feeble mind lies while you are young and don't understand what they are actually doing to your mind (i.e. forming it the way they see fit for their own ends by specially designed social engineering techniques). That's what the public educational systems worldwide are basically ? enslavement/indoctrination/conformism-enforcing camps.

4. While serious governmental crimes (governmental terrorism) is always put away in the eyes of the public by mass media propaganda that "all is fine, or at least it's better than before", real political-economical-social crimes of epic proportions are being hidden from the eyes of the ignorant and brainwashed complacent citizborgs (citizen borgs).

5. Yes, we ARE (although I did seem to hyporbolize a bit but I did that just to make my point a bit more clear)!

The only thing keeping the governments of the world from killing us straight away IS because they need you as human capital to power their agendas and further technoscientific progress towards the realization of their goals. And these goals don't include the survival of anyone else but them. Also, we are greater in number.

We are mostly slaves of the societal expectations of our societies, societies founded upon dismissing the real truths and constant truth-seeking and supporting your one-sided point of view, which only exists because of it being lobbied by your 'political representatives' who have nothing to do with what those who elect them wish to accomplish.

If you can't see the total decadence of postmodern civilization ? both Western and Eastern, then you are simply asleep my friend, or you simply prefer to live in the fabricated world of mass delusions and the enforcement of your views upon others while pretending of "wishing the greater good for everyone" cr*p.

No offense, but neither you, nor I (nor any one living human today) know reality the way it really and truly is; human opinions become kind of invalid when even some limited beings, such as humans, can clearly see the unjustified evils around them being masked as 'the Good' and still wish to support the current status quo.

Postmodern global society lacks all morality, and as such, can't possibly preach any morality that isn't actually a 'morality' of "my self-interest is more justified than yours because I feel more important than you and deserve to live more than you do. WHY? Because I want to survive and see you perish!"

Anything else but total skepticism and harsh honest sociocultural criticism isn't even worth considering as a valid point in any postmodern discussions of ethics and/or aesthetics.

That's my two cents. Feel free to toss yours, at least that freedom of expression hasn't been completely erased by our 'good' governments, only because we're still fighting to protect our freedom although the resistance is getting weaker by the second...

P.S. Also, people are born inequal by nature and no human-imposed (legal, social, etc) laws, wishful thinking or good practices can ever change that. People are just doubling their nature-originating inequality in the social realm using their actions in order to achieve their goals, regardless of all imposed rules or morality restraints. And by knowing this, how could you even claim to have a say in ethical discussions? It's hypocritical at the very least.

Nevertheless, I say that all deserve to voice their opinions and by saying that we should all be equal at least when it comes to personal freedom of expression and thought, I confirm that I'm not the 'Marxist' that you claim that I am (and who I am definitely not since I'm hypercritical of both all forms of governments and society as well, and also don't see any form of human society as fair, which a Marxist wouldn't think).

 

[monkey jesus]

You are obviously a clever guy but I think you credit big business and government with far more organisational ability and malicious intent than is really the case.

Capping the amount of data you can send in a month on your internet connection is not a form of censorship. Cutting you off from the internet/imprisoning you because of what you are saying is.

I agree that the media has immense power to influence opinion and that scares me but all I see them promoting is a constant stream of aspirational bullshit designed to get me to bankrupt myself for a fancy car and an IKEA coffee table. I feel that I live in a society where I can quite happily reject that and seek out my own media sources that I feel I can trust and live pretty much however I like within the rule of law in the society I choose to live in.

You also seem to blur the line between morality and altruism, I will pursue my own self interest but not to the detriment of anyone else but I will not allow another's self-interest to harm me.

I understand a lot of what you are saying (even the undergrad morality essay tacked onto the end and waaaaay off topic) but what's the endgame? Unless the Mafia's have some grand plan for all the power and control they are amassing (apparently) then they are gaining power for powers sake.

If there are some shadowy elites somewhere pulling the strings they appear to want to sell me shit and make me watch reality television. There is some horrible shit going on in the world and I have better means to access information about it than ever before in human history and if I choose I can communicate with millions of other folk try to change it.

See if all I am is human capital then I have worth to to the Mafia, I am a spending unit, right now I have the ability to reach out and touch other spending units in ways that are totally out of the control of any big business. You think that wikileaks could have existed 10 years ago?

And finally: your philosophy of everything is inherently and irrevocably unfair is a doctrine to accept the status quo.