Public Face of Anonymous Leaves Group

Gunkerty Jeb writes "Barrett Brown, the reporter who became a media-friendly spokesperson for the shadowy hacking group Anonymous, says that he is quitting the group in the wake of a public feud that has broken out between different hacker factions within the loosely organized collective."

Comments

Someone is encouraging the dissension

[elrous0]

Pardon me as I break my tin-foil hat out here. But there are a lot of government agencies and companies who have a vested interest in seeing Anon fall to pieces. The timing on this is almost as convenient as Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Julian Assange being arrested for sexual assault (the former right after he pulled decisively ahead of pro-American Nicolas Sarkozy in the polls and the later just weeks after he released a series of secret documents that embarrassed the U.S.). But then, I've always said that pedophilia and sexual assault charges are the quickest way to discredit someone publicly--way better than anything as crude as assassination.

Don't get me wrong, here. I'm not the kind of guy who thinks the moon landings were faked or that the U.S. planned 9-11 or any of that horseshit. But sometimes the timing on certain events just strikes me as a little too convenient for mere coincidence. And as was done with Wikileaks, the first step in a descrediting campaign is to encourage dissension from within and to get some internal plants/buy-offs to publicly bad-mouth the leadership (Daniel Domscheit-Berg, I'm looking in your direction, little plant). Just don't be suprised to see some Anon leaders suddenly facing rape/pedophilia/sexual assault charges in the near future. You'll know for sure if beautiful women suddenly start throwing themselves at 4channers in public.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension

[circletimessquare]

it's the boy who cried wolf syndrome: conspiracy theory is such a favorite currency of the low iq and not quite mentally sound crowd, that if an actual real conspiracy theory happens, no one will believe it

the effect of all the low iq and mentally deficient wack jobs constantly running around and crying wolf on conspiracies is to basically ensure that any rational and realistic consideration of an actual conspiracy theory is discounted up front

all those constantly babbling about conspiracy theories actually help conspiracy theories succeed, because they hide the tiny signals in a fountain of noise

i frequently laugh at and pour derision on conspiracy theory crack pots. however, i readily admit conspiracy theories are real. its just that they are exceedingly rare because they are so hard to pull off in airtight secrecy. but the dumber you are or the more mentally deranged you are, the more they seem likely, because your fear/ paranoia/ schizophrenia or dim perceptive abilities are unable to see just how incredibly hard an actual conspiracy theory is to actually pull off. how many ways it can fail, and continue to fail, long after the fact. how long has it been from the kennedy assassination. no one, NO ONE, the vast conspiracy has issued a peep about it, even accidentally? no one is still interested? come on! a lone asshole shot kennedy, not some mafia/ cia/ cuban/ whatever plot. occam's razor, my deluded friends, occam's razor

but conspiracy theories do have value in this world: entertainment. they are a frequent part of hollywood movies, because, like alien invasions or superheroes, they tickle our fancy. even though we know such things are impossible (well, those of us who are mentally sound realize superheros, aliens, and overarching vast conspiracies by secret black ops agencies are impossible)

please note conspiracy theory proponents: all the noise you dingbats constantly make about conspiracy theories, help to hide the actual real rare ones. not that that fact is going to change your behavior. because you're stupid and/ or deranged. but carry on, i need to laugh. yes, i know: the chemtrails from the government airplanes and the fluoridated water has completely turned me into a sheep. (giggle)

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension

[zill]

Anonymous Coward writes:

It's the same as al-Qaeda. Killing bin Laden will not do much.

Breaking news
A member of the hacktivist group Anonymous has just announced that their organizational hierarchy is identical to that of al-Qaeda's, thus proving the suspicion that both terrorist groups are related and have been working together. The leaders of the two group could not be reached for comments.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension

[LWATCDR]

Or they are a bunch of delusional thugs and the delusion is falling apart in the cold light of reality. It has to be big business and the government that wants to see anon fail?
Fail at what? Being mindless jerks that take there revenge on anybody the feel they can? Like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)#Epilepsy_Foundation_forum_invasion
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)#No_Cussing_Club

The attack on Sony is just the latest example. Anon was at it's best a gang of relatively harmless jerks. Now they are just dangerous jerks with delusions that they have a right to be judge, jury, and executioner.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension

[elrous0]

The French Socialist Party gets its best shot in 22 years of winning the Presidency and overthrowing a strongly pro-American regime. But a year before the election, their leading candidate, a guy with no criminal record in his 62 years who is leading by double digits in all the polls, suddenly decides to rape a maid in New York. That's quite a convenient coincidence for the United States and their friend Nicolas Sarkozy, no? That's right up their in convenience with Julian Assange deciding to become a serial rapist just a few weeks after leaking troves of secret U.S. State Department and Pentagon documents.

Isn't it nice when all your enemies decide to become rapists after they cross you?

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension

[NeutronCowboy]

Overthrowing a strongly pro-American regime? Wow, you really don't know Sarkozy or the French very much. He's strongly pro-American only in the context of French foreign politics since de Gaulle, who was almost obsessed with throwing a wrench into American plans in Europe. Sarkozy likes America, but he also likes rich friends who host him during his vacations. The two go hand in hand for him.

As for DSK, he's apparently had a history of treating women in a less than gentlemanly fashion. The reason that DSK is the Socialists' best hope is because the others are intellectual lightweights (Segolene Royal, ugh) with no achievements to show for from a political perspective.

woot

[Osgeld]

drama from something that doesn't even exist, ladies and gentlemen we have hit web 3.0