Political Crossfire Forums

Not surprised that the FBI is denying that they had the information. But who can confirm that really? Only the FBI. And of course they are going to say it didn't come from them, especially if its something they weren't supposed to have in the first place (or we weren't supposed to know about them having it).

One of the more frightening aspects of this is the obvious collaboration between multinational corporations and government. I wonder if they share info back and forth.

If so that's no bueno.

You seem to be quite happy to take a bunch of slightly unhinged basement dwellers at their word JD.

I tend towards more skepticism, especially with these 'hive mind' internet groups, one of them might have gone rouge and now the others are trying to save face.

Again, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

It's more than at their word Boris. There is suggestive evidence. I would never take them at their word only. These anon hacker groups can be notoriously unreliable. Power struggles that erupt and take down groups and channels, entrapment, betrayal, provocateurs, snitches and on and on. I find some of the shenanigans entertaining and I find many of the releases of the utmost importance, but I simply can't be bothered with them myself.

I can only be compelled by what evidence there is. The only evidence that I have seen suggests that an FBI notebook was the subject of a phishing attack, the notebook of one of the persons involved in the intercepted Scotland Yard call. Consider the evidence contrary: the FBI's shouting denial and a small unheard of company proclaiming that they were hacked without offering any evidence that they were or how they were (I wouldn't be surprised if they just received a substantial "investment").

I mean, one could even argue that the whole thing was beginning to end orchestrated by the feds. Many argued that LulzSec itself was a plant, engineered to help pilot through stringent cyber crime laws and so on. Again, one must be led by what evidence there is otherwise there is no end to the conspiratorial narratives one could entertain.

Again, the "who oversees the overseers" quote goes both ways. And, again, it is the FBI with the longest record of abuse here. I will again cite programs such as COINTELPRO. Why in the name of God would you take this organization - with such an extensive record of criminal policies, violence, murder and mayhem - at their word?

Well one easy way to prove/disprove - post all 12 million UIDs. If they have them, it should be easy enough to do. The claim was they only got about 2 million UIDs otherwise so if they only have around 2 million, well easy to tell who's lying and who's not.