Seriously, ignore this thread.

[maks]

For the record, 'anonymous' is laughing at you for taking them seriously.

[Iguana Goddess]

For the record, 'anonymous' is laughing at you for taking them seriously.

Are they? Can you read my mind too? You can't can you? lol

[maks]

Are they? Can you read my mind too? You can't can you? lol

I don't need to read anyone's mind. The whole reason they started this whole 'anonymous hacker group' bullshit was to fool people like you. You're buying into a troll, you're no different than OB.

I AM THE STUPIDEST CUNT ON EARTH I AM 63 YEARS OLD AND MY PUSSY IS ALL DRIED UP FUCK SOPA

[FagglesMcGee]

I don't need to read anyone's mind. The whole reason they started this whole 'anonymous hacker group' bullshit was to fool people like you. You're buying into a troll, you're no different than OB.

While this could be true, it would be stupid of the government to rally against itself by endorsing software and procedures that they couldn't thwart without looking guilty in the first place. For instance, if they cracked a password that would take millions of years to unscramble in one day, there would be high suspicion surrounding it. So, if I'm using software endorsed by opposing factions that are proven to work, and are then compromised at lightning speed, it would expose the government as anonymous?

Your argument, while respected, is invalid.

While this could be true, it would be stupid of the government to rally against itself by endorsing software and procedures that they couldn't thwart without looking guilty in the first place. For instance, if they cracked a password that would take millions of years to unscramble in one day, there would be high suspicion surrounding it. So, if I'm using software endorsed by opposing factions that are proven to work, and are then compromised at lightning speed, it would expose the government as anonymous?

Your argument, while respected, is invalid.

that's alot of words and punctuation from a guy named FagglesMcGee.

[maks]

While this could be true, it would be stupid of the government to rally against itself by endorsing software and procedures that they couldn't thwart without looking guilty in the first place. For instance, if they cracked a password that would take millions of years to unscramble in one day, there would be high suspicion surrounding it. So, if I'm using software endorsed by opposing factions that are proven to work, and are then compromised at lightning speed, it would expose the government as anonymous?

Your argument, while respected, is invalid.

none of this has anything to do with the governemnt. A bunch of kids sold a line of bullshit to the press and the press ran with it. that's all there is to the story of anonymous.

[FagglesMcGee]

none of this has anything to do with the governemnt. A bunch of kids sold a line of bullshit to the press and the press ran with it. that's all there is to the story of anonymous.

Since paranoia would default on having everyone believe that the government runs the news, it would start there.
Government>News Channels>People.

It has to start somewhere, and it has to end somewhere. Surely you're not thick-skulled enough to not consider that as an option.

[maks]

Since paranoia would default on having everyone believe that the government runs the news, it would start there.
Government>News Channels>People.

It has to start somewhere, and it has to end somewhere. Surely you're not thick-skulled enough to not consider that as an option.

Lets default to the opinions of a bunch of paranoids, great idea.