Slashdot Mirror


Slashdot Mentioned In Virginia Terrorism Report

megamerican alerted us to a leaked document (PDF) from a Virginia Fusion Center titled "2009 Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment." The document is marked as "Law Enforcement Sensitive," not to be shown to public. Citizens for Legitimate Government has a write-up. Slashdot gets a mention on page 45 — not as a terrorist organization itself, but as one of the places that members of Anonymous may hang out: "A 'loose coalition of Internet denizens,' Anonymous consists largely of users from multiple internet sites such as 4chan, 711chan, 420chan, Something Awful, Fark, Encyclopedia Dramatica, Slashdot, IRC channels, and YouTube. Other social networking sites are also utilized to mobilize physical protests. ... Anonymous is of interest not only because of the sentiments expressed by affiliates and their potential for physical protest, but because they have innovated the use of e-protests and mobilization. Given the lack of a unifying creed, this movement has the potential to inspire lone wolf behavior in the cyber realms." According to the report, cell phones and digital music players have been used to transfer plans related to criminal activity, and therefore presumably could be grounds for suspicion. Podcasting is also suspicious.

13 of 779 comments (clear)

  1. Re:A.C. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anonymous working as a group is probably the biggest joke on the media I've heard in a while. It's like saying all unsolved murder mysteries are caused by the same terrorist group (until each murder is solved!)

    They just don't understand the joke, do they?

  2. Re:Anon by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You laugh, but Ted Kennedy has already be caught up in this sort of nonsense.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  3. VA better watch out! by rotide · · Score: 5, Insightful
    VA better watch itself, all of us Slashdoters may assemble, protest and overthrow their state government!

    Slashdot is known for being a terrorist hotbed of activity.

    Seriously though, is it getting just so utterly bullshit that they list Slashdot as a potential terrorist hangout? I mean, really? Is the government this god damned stupid? I suppose in the back of my mind I always knew it was, but wow.

    I don't want to come off as a nutjob here, but this country is falling down hard. A new revolution in the next 100 years appears to be more than possible at this point. Laws are getting absolutely ridiculous.

    I realize VA is far from the federal government, but this "OMG EVERY1 IZ TERRORIZT!" stuff is getting really scary.

    Terrorist.. This decades Communist.. Make lists and round 'em up, boys!

    Fucking scary.

  4. Re:Kind of funny by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Ethnic cleansing" would be a better description of what the founding of America was based on.

    Terrorism is something else and a term that gets abused to the point of making it meaningless.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  5. Re:Level Up by Vanders · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who paid off Virginia state to label Anonymous as a terrorist organization

    Scientology. Or Habbo.com. Either could be the culprit.

    how much of Anonymous will be loyal enough to stick around

    That's such an illogical conjecture I'm not sure where to start. "Anonymous" isn't some sort of highly organised group. It's just a bunch of people on various websites. Going to those websites doesn't make you a terrorist, or a furry, or a protester, or whatever it is someone else is doing. "Stick around"? Makes no sense.

  6. Re:Level Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anonymous is a microcosm of society. There is no formal method for joining. There are no membership lists or membership dues.

    There are people doing good things (for whatever you consider good), people doing bad things (for whatever you consider bad), people doing neutral things (for any other action), and people doing nothing.

    When someone says "Anonymous will do xyz", they're not charging everyone who associates themselves with the group to do xyz. They are simply invoking the protection of being lost in a crowd and the protection of free association.

    All things that, in and of themselves, are perfectly legal in the United States. However, what is done once under the cloak of these protections, on the other hand, may be illegal.

    Personally, Anonymous scares me a hell of a lot less than the far right militia groups (which, by the way, all do the same thing and are legal).

  7. Re:That silly Constitution by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    when instead such energy would be better spent guarding the porous borders or monitoring the FOREIGN FUNDED (Saudi) mosques (which is where most world wide terrorism originates).

    [citation needed]

    Perhaps you're unaware of the terrorism that occurs in central Africa on a daily basis, that is conveniently ignored? Or does that not count because it doesn't greatly affect American economic interests?

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  8. Re:Level Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's such an illogical conjecture I'm not sure where to start. "Anonymous" isn't some sort of highly organised group. It's just a bunch of people on various websites. Going to those websites doesn't make you a terrorist, or a furry, or a protester, or whatever it is someone else is doing. "Stick around"? Makes no sense.

    That's basically what the report actually says about Anonymous. They got a mention and a small write-up in the report because a few individuals identifying with them committed minor acts of vandalism. It says that they aren't really an organized group. The main reason they're even mentioned seems to be to give an example of people coordinating protests or actions online.

    The "phones and ipod" section just gives examples of how terrorists and organized criminals were taking advantage of technology-- examples which are already pretty well-known, really.

    This isn't alarmism on the part of the Virginia government. The summary is silly.

  9. Re:Message to Virginia Fusion Center, from Anonymo by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    remeber bretheren....

    4f 6e 6c 79 20 72 65 61 6c 6c 79 20 73 74 75 70 69 64 20 70 61 72 61 6e 6f 69 64 73 20 74 68 69 6e 6b 20 74 68 61 74 20 74 68 65 72 65 20 69 73 20 61 20 73 65 63 72 65 74 20 73 6f 63 69 65 74 79 20 74 72 79 69 6e 67 20 74 6f 20 67 65 74 20 74 68 65 6d 2e 20 20 20 50 65 6f 70 6c 65 20 69 6e 20 67 65 6e 65 72 61 6c 20 61 72 65 20 74 6f 6f 20 6c 61 7a 79 20 74 6f 20 61 63 74 20 65 6e 2d 6d 61 73 73 65 27 20 74 6f 20 64 69 73 72 75 70 74 20 74 68 69 6e 67 73 20 69 66 20 74 68 65 79 20 61 72 65 20 63 6f 6d 66 6f 72 74 61 62 6c 65 2e 20 20 49 66 20 79 6f 75 20 61 72 65 20 63 72 65 61 74 69 6e 67 20 6d 69 73 65 72 79 20 61 6e 64 20 64 65 61 74 68 20 66 6f 72 20 61 20 67 72 6f 75 70 2c 20 74 68 65 6e 20 62 79 20 61 6c 6c 20 6d 65 61 6e 73 20 77 6f 72 72 79 2e 0a 0a 42 75 74 20 74 68 65 73 65 20 70 65 6f 70 6c 65 20 61 72 65 20 73 69 6d 70 6c 79 20 63 6c 75 74 63 68 69 6e 67 20 61 74 20 73 74 72 61 77 73 2e 2e 0a

    It all goes down 4/20/09 at 16:20 local time. Tell the others!

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  10. Re:A.C. by Assmasher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Genius. How great would it be if Slashdot changed 'Anonymous Coward' to Lone Wolf for a few weeks?

    --
    Loading...
  11. Re:That silly Constitution by Raenex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A terrorist attacks civilian targets. Freedom fighters attack military targets. There is a big difference.

    You can be a freedom fighter and a terrorist. When will American history books call the people behind the Boston Tea Party terrorists? There's also the matter of a couple of nuclear bombs on Japan, and the fire bombing of Dresden.

  12. Social Science Research Gone Bad by HikingStick · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This report is just an example of Social Science research gone bad. Someone picked up on the fact that some individuals use "Anonymous" logons for ill, and they made a generalization that this must apply to all persons who use "Anonymous" logons. That's a cardinal sin in social science research. While a goal of such research is to make generalizations about a group, such theories must be tested before they can be asserted as even mildly authoritative. Had they simply done a little more research (or hired an outside researcher who wasn't already looking for "the devil"), they also might have learned that ordinary people will often use anonymous logons for other reasons:
    • They don't want to hassle with registering on yet another site.
    • They are using a public computer and don't want to enter their account information there.
    • They are replying to another post on a highly sensitive topic, want to speak frankly, but don't want that thread tied to their primary user identity.
    • They fat-fingered their password too many times and just don't want to bother with the reset at the time.
    • They know that others in the physical world have learned their moniker and visit the same sites, and they want to make comments that might not be well-received by their real-world counterparts.
    • They could be making political commentary and want to protect themselves from government sanction. Hey, the founding fathers did it, and it seems that we (in the United States) may have more and more reason to do that as time progresses since our government is taking on more characteristics of Big Brother lately.

    There might be dozens of other reasons why people would legitimately want to stay anonymous.

    Oh, yes, I realize I posted this one while logged in. Let them mark me an enemy of the state if they so desire.

    [I hereby raspberry those segments of United States government, or any other agencies for that matter, that conduct such shoddy research and make generalizations based on fear and incomplete information.]

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  13. Re:Terrorism by Zelig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since they demonstrate the tactical capacity to put a bunch of people in a place, at a time, without law enforcement getting a sniff of it beforehand.

    Don't think of it as terrorism per se: think of it as a people-organizing toolset, and it ought to terrify any police state who's paying attention. To the extent the US behaves like a police state, this is a threat.

    Take a look at Improv Everywhere's Cell Phone Symphony. Heck, much of what IE does is militarily relevant. It says, "We're a bunch of peaceful clowns. But if we'd wanted to get you, you'd have been got". It says "Your security theater is irrelevant".