In the Alternative News community, it has always been a foundational understanding that the Mainstream Media is a propaganda matrix of information, with an agenda that is backed up by the dollar of corporate America. More and more people in the past few years have woken up to this notion, and stations like FOX, CNN, and others are slowly becoming more and more inadequate for the coming generations. But what about the counter culture?
It would probably surprise a lot of “hip” college students to know that VICE Entertainment was recently given $500 Million dollars by elitist Media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and it might surprise even more people to know that Glenn Greenwald, journalist of the Snowden Files, was recently given $250 Million to fund his project, The Intercept, by Pierre Omidyar. Omidyar, owner of eBay and Payal, bears obvious ties to the NSA with metadata exchange and possibly even more; this is not to mention Snowden’s subtle red flags of his own.
So what about Anonymous, the internet’s knight clad in shining armor and a twiddly moustache? How authentic were they, and how authentic are they now? Those familiar to the alternative information scene will be no strangers to the idea of the government’s disinformation campaigns, (for an example, google Richard Doty; or better yet, look into Timothy Leary’s friendship with Allen Dulles of the CIA). The simple fact is that the Media Moguls are aware of the Age of Enlightenment that the internet has brought, and are funding their own ways to navigate away from it at all costs. So what about this hacktivism movement that is getting streamlined? An analysis of recent events and some Anonymous history begins painting an interesting picture for those who would try to piece it together, and the only way to elaborate is to dive right in. A final note should perhaps state that hacktivism seems to be one of the driving saviors and preservers of this Information Age, and that this is not a criticism of the movement itself, but rather of who might be pulling its strings at the Mainstream level.
Anonymous, for all intents and purposes, seems to have started out as a very genuine movement. Those who care to recall LULZXMAS in 2011 as part of Operation: AntiSec (a joint venture between Anonymous and LulzSec that hacked into Stratfor private security, and stole over $700,000 worth of the personal accounts of some of the country’s wealthiest individuals, donating to charity) would also take care to note that this was one of the biggest government power-plays in hacktivism to date. It’s become common knowledge that half of the Operation was the FBI via hacker-turned-informant, Hector Xavier Monteguer “SABU,” and this also revealed the “honeypot” entrapment that this hacking operation was originally meant to be, in order to imprison Jeremy Hammond, (who was the most wanted hacker on the planet at the time) but this eventually led to the imprisonment of all members of LulzSec and Anonymous-affiliated journalist, Barrett Brown.
For those unaware, LulzSec was Anonymous without any sort of hacktivism ethics. They had a rebel-without-a-cause style approach to their hacking, and they truly just wanted to set the world on fire, and were responsible for the Sony hacks of 2011 that brought the servers down for a summer, hacking the CIA’s website, as well as most of the major news stations’ websites for a variety of pranks. The inherent anarchy within the ideology of LulzSec, and how much this progression from prior hacktivism startled the US Intelligence Apparatus, was simply something they could not have.
So through heavy surveillance they were able to sniff out SABU (depending on who’s telling the story, the date of the hacker’s arrest is different) to commit one massive swipe across the board. The reason this is so pertinent to the analysis of Anonymous is because of the players that were taken out, and furthermore the examples they became to the hacking community. Operation: AntiSec became the modern-day equivalent to Hammond’s head on a stake on the White House lawn for all hackers to observe—Barret Brown’s as well, for journalists. Curiously enough, however, Brown has just begun a column for The Intercept from his cell in prison—so if Greenwald and his latest venture are being called into question here, it can only be assumed that either Brown has succumbed, either knowingly or unknowingly, or he was always a form of controlled opposition to begin with.
Moving forward, some other related notes of interest presently revolve around the role that Anonymous has cultivated in the media lately. For some reason, no one has bothered to question why the hacker group has suddenly become such a trendy topic of discussion, even in the Mainstream News. For the last year or two (not long after the aftermath of Operation: AntiSec had come to fruition) there seems to be a stark contrast in the way Anonymous has presented itself; originally having an anti-establishment/media outlook, that developed into neutrality to the press, and then what seems to be a full-blown correspondence with the Mainstream Press.
In regards to the Paris Attacks and Anon’s Operation: ISIS, Guy Fawkes has recently waved some very peculiar red flags. On the surface it seems like truly a great thing that The Last American Vagabond could certainly get behind, and no American would argue that eradicating ISIS’ social networking footprint is a great thing—but it should be called into question how exactly Anonymous is helping illustrate the situation in their own way. To be blunt: if Anonymous is all about full disclosure, then why are they being so shy with disclosing NATO’s funding of al-Qaeda, which has become the foundation of Islamic terrorism and the group that has spawned all current groups.
Another development discussed by Sibel Edmonds of Boiling Frogs Post and researcher James Corbett, even suggests NATO’s Project Gladio could be the missing link that exposes continuous NATO-funded terrorism from the beginning of it, to the present day. So where is this in the discussion of Greenwald’s “Surveillance State” rants and Snowden’s “words of wisdom” to the American citizens that he always manages to give? If NATO-funded terrorism is an undeniable fact of geopolitics no matter which way you cut it, then why is this not being discussed? Julian Assange of WikiLeaks is the only person who seems to not only address the issue, but be incredibly outspoken about it, and it could be a possibility that Assange himself is the only authentic piece left of this hijacked hipster hacktivism movement.
Not only has Assange never been portrayed in a favorable light by the mainstream media, but he’s been stuck in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for well over 1,000 days at this point, seeming to say that he either bit the wrong person’s hand or has always been a thorn in the Elite’s side. Assange has also gone on record in a recent interview with Democracy Now! questioning Glenn Greenwald’s funding by the very people he claims to be advocating against. The manner in which an individual is portrayed by the Malevolent Mainstream Media is very telling; Assange’s tarnished reputation proves to be one of his greatest assets, while Anonymous has continued to be fostered by the Media, and Greenwald and Snowden have launched a completely new spin within it.
Returning to Anonymous, their recent release of alleged “terrorist plans” was perhaps one the biggest indicators in this long string of observed curiosities. Without releasing their sources, Anon distributed this list to the Media:
It is important to counter terrorism intended for any innocent individuals; that being said, let it also be known that the War on Terror is a war against an ideology and a vessel for propaganda that has been funded by Western Imperialism. Anyone who is not addressing this is ultimately part of the problem, because they are either promoting disinformation (whether they realize it or not) or acting as a diversion. Anonymous, in this case, seems to be a diversion in order to cull would-be-hacktivists. If the group was truly about stopping terrorism, why wouldn’t they be interested in clearing the air for all American citizens? This is, after all, what they claim to be doing, and surely there must be authentic members of Anonymous still around. Yet sadly, it appears that Anonymous America has been infiltrated by the Intelligence Apparatus that the hacktivist group claims to fight. Now it might be a low-blow to Anons who are still sensitive to the betrayal, but if SABU was an informant for so long without ever being outed, then ANYONE could be an informant. The real win that the US Intelligence had with Operation: AntiSec was the doubt that they planted in hacktivists, and it might very well be that this doubt was the ultimate downfall of Anonymous as a collective.
So is Anonymous a form of controlled opposition? It would appear the answer is yes, but also no. The largest nail in the coffin against Anonymous is the fact that, despite any authenticity left in the collective, they have become totally and entirely compromised by capacity—the capacity for infiltration, which has already been established. Guy Fawkes seems to have been reduced to yet another media puppet, and for what it’s worth, it seems that Greenwald and Snowden have been controlled opposition for quite some time, if not from the very beginning. Of course, all of the different discussed points could just be a large web of “convenient journalism,” making connections where perhaps there are none. Yet the facts seem to speak for themselves, and soon enough the truth will come to light, whatever that truth may be.
If the Hacktivism movement ever sees Julian Assange again, it might be a day for true celebration, but the day he’s released also might mean that a deal has been made. Until then, Assange’s predicament and his stance on geopolicy and full disclosure seem to speak for themselves. However, regardless of the specifics of the characters at hand, it is crucial to remember that the Mainstream Media’s incentive is a dollar sign dangled by the American elite, and that anything being promoted by them is attached to an active disinformation agenda, regardless of the intentions of the people being reported on, and this is certainly not going to change with the hacktivism movement.
Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1roCo91PTuE&feature=youtu.be, http://www.ibtimes.com/anonymous-says-isis-plans-attacks-against-paris-world-sunday-2194926, http://motherboard.vice.com/read/exclusive-how-an-fbi-informant-helped-anonymous-hack-brazil, http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/hacker-sabu-defends-informing-anonymous-fbi-interview, http://www.wired.com/2013/11/hammond-sentence/, https://freebarrettbrown.org/, http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/03/01/pando-expose-glenn-greenwalds-boss-billionaire-omidyar-co-funded-ukraine-revolution-groups-with-us-government/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9K5I8SIwoM, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVMe9bdrau4, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/04/vice-investment-investment-digital-media, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3GUk-V_9XQ, http://www.gnosticmedia.com/SecretHistoryMagicMushroomsProject#R., http://www.gnosticmedia.com/manufacturing-the-deadhead-a-product-of-social-engineering-by-joe-atwill-and-jan-irvin/
This work by The Last American Vagabond is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, and may be reposted as is, with attribution to the author and TheLastAmericanVagabond.com. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at Ryan@thelastamericanvagabond.com.