Comments on: Anonymous to stop DDoS attacks and start spamming Wikileaks content?

By: Mighty

Mighty — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 14:29:55 +0000

People should feel free to know the real state of things. Without hipocrisy and pink glasses.

If in current situation, the only possible way of exposing this to people requires such measures, then those measures are justified.

By: Joe Dunfee

Joe Dunfee — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 06:32:33 +0000

Gee, their version of openness means that;
– Everyone’s private correspondence should be made public.
– People should feel free to be a spammer.
– Manufacturing sites for Vaccines to combat bioweapons should be exposed.

So, who are the kind of people they are getting to support their cause?

By: Tachyonic Cargo

Tachyonic Cargo — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 05:31:49 +0000

That’s how I learned about the heavenly singer that is His Holiness, Rick Astley. Were I not searching YouTube a couple years back, for yet another “Leave Britney Alone” remix, I’d never have been tricked into watching that Rick Astley video . . . and later joining the Astleynauts, a cult inspired by the singings of Astley and who profess that the Almighty One will return to pop stardom someday, riding a comet, to take the true believers to the promised land in the Heavens.

LOL

All joking aside, as far as “spam” goes, spamming WikiLeaks has got to be the most productive and actually informative spam to ever come into being. Besides, it’s got to be a lot more legal than DDoS attacks, and unlike most spam on the internet, something good may actually come of it. There are going to be a whole lot of Nigerian princes, who are going to go broke, and bottles of penis “enhancement” herbs that are going to go unsold, when the internet is covered end to end with WikiLeaks spam, and none of the regular spammers can get a scam in edgewise anymore.

That should be the new slogan: Spam with a purpose. Wikileaks.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:15:20 +0000

Anonymous has no leaders. They are just people. The point of spamming the information is to get it out. People that care to know the information aren’t the targets. If someone who was being willingly oblivious finds a video they thought they wanted to see and instead they learn of a government secret, they have been informed. Some people need knowledge forces to their attention; isn’t that why we have public education?

By: DigDug

DigDug — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:19:49 +0000

Don’t these d-bags have a Trek convention to attend or something?

By: Shane McGlaun

Shane McGlaun — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:34:56 +0000

Posting things with fake titles in places where the real topic has no relevance is clearly spam. If you want to get the word out on something that is a legitimate issue, doing it with spam simply doesn’t seem the best way to me. It comes across as bogus no matter what the topic is or how important the real topic might be.

By: An0n

An0n — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:15:39 +0000

This shows exactly how ignorant the media of this whole situation is, not only do they think there are leads of anonymous. They would prefer to report on the fact we are going to bring peoples attention to information they ought to know, instead of showing the public exactly what it is that has been hidden from them, more than likely at the detriment of their freedom.

By: Cracky

Cracky — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:58:47 +0000

So you think exposure is spam? That’s nice.