Anonymous Avenges Aaron

[Babe Ruth]

lmao, like serving as a juror is some kind of an achevment. lol.

Serving as a juror is actually an important duty, assuming one understands the notion of civic obligation. Assuming the jury is fully informed and understands its role as a brake on government mischief, the jury box is far more effective for "government of the people" than is the ballot box.

If it is true that we the people have any control over the government at all, then the role of the jury is crucial to that control.

[+HerNibs]

One could argue, that as an Anarchist group, they are their own check and balance - if one group doesn't like what another group is doing they deal with it themselves.

There's not "Anonmyous HQ" like SPECTRE from James Bond, just a bunch of people standing up for what they believe through the appropriation of a shared image.

Exactly. It's not a cohesive group with leaders and monthly dues or anything. The same group of people who attacked Scientology may not be the same group who are doing this bit. Anonymous is a description. The entire group doesn't have to (and usually doesn't) on any one action. The membership changes from minute to minute.

They aren't good or evil. About the biggest thing they agree on is cats/kittens.

Nibs

[Emperor Sherlock]

I to have mixed feelings about anonymous; but that's because some "posers" depict them in another light at times...

[Frank Merton]

If it is true that we the people have any control over the government at all, then the role of the jury is crucial to that control.

Well I wonder. There are rules of evidence and legal procedures and ways of removing people of certain types from the jury. I suppose there are reasons for these things, but they sure open the door to having juries that are not representative, not fully informed, and manipulated.

[aztek]

If it is true that we the people have any control over the government at all, then the role of the jury is crucial to that control.

lol, you believe in this sharade?? i don't. ever wondered why you are dissmised from it if your spouse\family member, or even gf\bf is a lawyer?

[AsteroidX]

The OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony trials certainly did much to undermine the credibility of the jury. But then again we do abide that jury rule and even if they got those wrong theres many more instances where they got it wrong resulting in lengthy prison sentences and even death for innocent individuals. Its a price we pay for mot living under a judge only system where the same types of miscarriages of justice would occur.

[Babe Ruth]

Well I wonder. There are rules of evidence and legal procedures and ways of removing people of certain types from the jury. I suppose there are reasons for these things, but they sure open the door to having juries that are not representative, not fully informed, and manipulated.

Bingo!

Since the Sparf decision back in about 1895, the government has been making steady effort to eliminate the jury by keeping jurors ignorant of their power and subservient to the guy wearing the black robe.

If you're interested, www.fija.org

[Babe Ruth]

lol, you believe in this sharade?? i don't. ever wondered why you are dissmised from it if your spouse\family member, or even gf\bf is a lawyer?

They spell it 'charade'.

I do believe in it, but the trouble is that most folks, yourself as an example, do not understand the process, and are completely uninformed of the proper role of the jury in a society that supposedly governs itself. As Colbert quipped, the only thing the american people like less than voting is jury duty. Cynical view: mission accomplished--the people don't want to hold the government to its rules and regulations.

[regeneratia]

One could argue, that as an Anarchist group, they are their own check and balance - if one group doesn't like what another group is doing they deal with it themselves.

There's not "Anonmyous HQ" like SPECTRE from James Bond, just a bunch of people standing up for what they believe through the appropriation of a shared image.

Oh boy, I sure do hope that is true. But hope in politics has rounded up some really bitter disappointments. I will never HOPE on a politician again.

[regeneratia]

Exactly. It's not a cohesive group with leaders and monthly dues or anything. The same group of people who attacked Scientology may not be the same group who are doing this bit. Anonymous is a description. The entire group doesn't have to (and usually doesn't) on any one action. The membership changes from minute to minute.

They aren't good or evil. About the biggest thing they agree on is cats/kittens.

Nibs

And you know this How?

[+HerNibs]

And you know this How?

Eh, pretty common knowledge.

Here is more information.

Spend a few minutes on 4chan...wait, bad idea. You don't want to go there.

Nibs

[regeneratia]

I hardly consider Wikipedia to be an authority or valid statement of fact. Wikipedia is based merely what is reported, and not the dissimination of fact. Reports are NOT facts. And they are frequently slanted.

[AsteroidX]

Because anonymoys themselves say they are not a single entity but a drive for change. They take many forms and operations across the globe. If you watch a couple of videos from there "publicity" arm you would understand the groups morality and principles better. And yes there is a disorganized hacking group that remains anonymous for legal reasons.

Its not rocket science its a drive for social change which has expanded from its inception.

Edited February 3, 2013 by AsteroidX

[Order66]

Because anonymoys themselves say they are not a single entity but a drive for change. They take many forms and operations across the globe. If you watch a couple of videos from there "publicity" arm you would understand the groups morality and principles better. And yes there is a disorganized hacking group that remains anonymous for legal reasons.

Its not rocket science its a drive for social change which has expanded from its inception.

Every activist group claims they're saving the world, from PETA to the KKK. What's special about Anonymous? But I guess if saying something makes it true, then we can safely rely on Wikipedia.

[AsteroidX]

Every activist group claims they're saving the world, from PETA to the KKK. What's special about Anonymous? But I guess if saying something makes it true, then we can safely rely on Wikipedia.

We all have our beliefs. Depending on how deeply you believe your beliefs are not being "respected" determines how you react. Some choose to do nothing. It is ok. That is there belief.

I am in the group that wishes to not watch society crumble around me and live in a country that is viewed as a scourge by much of the world but for the decision making of a few.

I cannot speak for anonymous as I am on the outside. But I do like there public statements and have found nothing ethically wrong with there actions. I only wish they would dumb the dish of secrets they supposedly have gathered on the table for this supposed transparency they claim is so important.

Or perhaps they are the government itself.

The shades of grey are dark in this corner of the world.

Edited February 3, 2013 by AsteroidX

[Uncle Sam]

We all have our beliefs. Depending on how deeply you believe your beliefs are not being "respected" determines how you react. Some choose to do nothing. It is ok. That is there belief.

I am in the group that wishes to not watch society crumble around me and live in a country that is viewed as a scourge by much of the world but for the decision making of a few.

I cannot speak for anonymous as I am on the outside. But I do like there public statements and have found nothing ethically wrong with there actions. I only wish they would dumb the dish of secrets they supposedly have gathered on the table for this supposed transparency they claim is so important.

Or perhaps they are the government itself.

The shades of grey are dark in this corner of the world.

The problem with it, they are holding our nation hostage and telling our leaders what to do. They are threatening the country, which causes more problems than solve. Plus with unfiltered information, the information can be used against our sovereign or given to another hostile nation to use against us. I don't feel comfortable with hidden people controlling the secrets of my nation, there is no knowing what they plan on doing with the information.

[AsteroidX]

They are hidden because they are wanted by the FBI. There is actually many public elements to anonymous Uncle Sam. And as for your longterm discomfort by there actions they will eventually make the internet and these "secure" government sites safer because if they can break into them so can are enemies.

So if you can put the I cant see them aside understanding how wanted these hackers are then you might see the benefit they are providing. Hopefully for a socially changed America.

If they dont stick by the message they have stated then I will agree with you but the bottom line is the government doesnt have very good security in many of its systems and they will eventually be hacked by someone that intends to do true harm to this country and not just change the injustices going on in it.

There message is easy to find for anyone that wants to find it

[+HerNibs]

I hardly consider Wikipedia to be an authority or valid statement of fact. Wikipedia is based merely what is reported, and not the dissimination of fact. Reports are NOT facts. And they are frequently slanted.

Ok. Knock yourself out. Tons of information here. Spend a minute in the forum. Learn what NYPA means.

Nibs

[regeneratia]

Ok. Knock yourself out. Tons of information here. Spend a minute in the forum. Learn what NYPA means.

Nibs

No, thank you. My knowledge base is not able to be influenced by faceless people who have a history of attacking me in the forum. And my intuition is far more valid and valued by me than your links.

Edited February 5, 2013 by regeneratia

[+HerNibs]

No, thank you. My knowledge base is not able to be influenced by faceless people who have a history of attacking me in the forum. And my intuition is far more valid and valued by me than your links.

*LOL* Then why did you ask me. Heck, I probably said too much anyway. Rule #1 you know.

Nibs

[Babe Ruth]

The problem with it, they are holding our nation hostage and telling our leaders what to do. They are threatening the country, which causes more problems than solve. Plus with unfiltered information, the information can be used against our sovereign or given to another hostile nation to use against us. I don't feel comfortable with hidden people controlling the secrets of my nation, there is no knowing what they plan on doing with the information.

I would submit to you that they are holding our GOVERNMENT hostage, not our country. Those are 2 separate entities. We The People created the government way back when.

Not really are they holding them hostage, but they are attempting to blackmail the government. I'm all for it. For those who use force, and the government does, often the only thing they will respond to is force, or the threat of force. I'm all for it, but I wish Anonymous would just go ahead and spill the beans.

[regeneratia]

*LOL* Then why did you ask me. Heck, I probably said too much anyway. Rule #1 you know.

Nibs

(I have decided, after posting this, that I would rather message this response since it is off topic, rather than do it publicly. I find I cannot delete this.)

Edited February 8, 2013 by regeneratia