
Anonymous did not attack Stratfor - steve8918
http://pastebin.com/8yrwyNkt
======
Permit
Man it's a good thing I have this pastebin post to discredit my other pastebin
post.

~~~
blantonl
When one anonymous person tells the other anonymous person that they were not
responsible for the anonymous person's action, you better believe it.

------
jonhendry
It'd be funny if people started doing completely mundane things under the
banner of Anonymous.

For example, posting the receipt from a Coinstar machine.

THIS CHANGE RECEIPT IS THE WORK OF ANONYMOUS

TOTAL: $1.35

We are Anonymous

We do not forgive

We do not forget

Expect us

------
verroq
Anyone can call themselves Anonmyous, and use its name for anything.

~~~
jimmyjim
So far as I have observed, while the group is loosely-knit, and really is in
concept "anyone" -- in terms of general perception by media and people there
rather actually is some consensus of who is more Anonymous than the other.

And that's on the basis of who historically carried out most of the attacks,
as were reported/confirmed on Twitter by Sabu (
<https://twitter.com/anonymouSabu> ) and AnonymousIRC (
<https://twitter.com/AnonymousIRC> ). Sabu was the de facto leader of LulzSec
(the most technically able person in LulzSec -- the only member of LulzSec
who's in fact still on the run) and he seems to be promoting the leak pretty
persistently. AnonymousIRC did also take responsibility for this one.

~~~
Apocryphon
So really, we should view the attacks as committed by LulzSec members under
the banner of Anonymous, but not Anon "proper", correct?

------
asto
For those who don't know who "Sabu" is: _Sabu is an alleged leader of the
hacking group LulzSec. He features prominently in the group's published IRC
chats, and is a supporter of the "Free Topiary" campaign.

The Economist refers to Sabu as one of LulzSec's six core members and their
"most expert" hacker._

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabu_(hacktivist)>

------
nkoren
Unfortunately for Anonymous, false-flag ops against it are entirely too easy
to pull off. Perhaps if it had some way of identifying itself with a public
key...

------
regularfry
Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you claim a global mandate, it means
you don't get to disavow anyone's actions.

------
jimrandomh
Yep, saw that coming. Some people tried to build a group identity and
reputation around the name "Anonymous", made it fashionable, and now every
spook, wannabe-spook, and random vandal uses the name, regardless of whether
they're associated with the original group or not.

~~~
burgerbrain
What original group?

It's _highly_ likely that the first people who used the identity never did any
of the things that you've heard of.

------
EGreg
As I said, it's tough to be anonymous and not be spoofed at the same time.
Perhaps this is not the real anonymous? Or maybe it is. This group is
vulnerable to having their aims completely diluted for precisely this reason -
that they are anonymous :P

The question is - does anyone at Anonymous actually know if the other people
were not also part of Anonymous? Why do they have any more right to be called
Anonymous than someone else? Oh the anonymousness...

------
anonamoose
the plot thickens?! <http://pastebin.com/DVNWEQDf>

------
hub_
pastebin is the new Press Agency. Let me know how it works out for you.

Maybe I should pastebin to the world I invented the cure for cancer, or
discovered cold fusion.

------
Zirro
"Some people are more Anonymous than others"

------
ThaddeusQuay2
We won't have the final word on this matter until we hear from
<http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=anonymous>.

------
Slimy
Here's what Anonymous did do this holiday:
<http://www.techmeme.com/111220/p19#a111220p19>

------
mikecane
I have updated my post with that press release:
[http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/anonymous-
antisec-...](http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/anonymous-antisec-
takes-down-stratfor/)

