Who is Anonymous?

By John Amaruso

Who is Anonymous? A product of the new world order. A world in which societies, culture, technology, communications, governments, businesses and all alike are so highly interconnected and dependent on one another that the balance of power has shifted drastically. In such an age, the decentralization of power among nations has declined, in turn bringing rise to global social movements.

Anonymous, a phenomenon within and of itself, is a highly decentralized global network of online "Hacktivists" which have taken the globe by storm. These vigilantes have perpetrated dozens of high profile attacks on governments, corporations and individuals alike. The group seeks to eliminate social injustices and level the playing field for those who are disenfranchised by the current power play system that dominates our politics.

This group, facilitated by instantaneous communication, is made up of rogue, independent actors from all corners of the world, each with various goals in mind. They claim to represent all of mankind and to preserve basic human rights that have been abused. This organization with its efficiency and unstated agenda, has struck fear into the hearts of those with power. Those who seek to exploit, abuse power, and corrupt governments around the world have met their match.

Their moral righteousness, quest for justice and thirst for fairness have led them to disrupt the activities of many of these unethical organizations.

Lockheed Martin, one of the world's largest private security contracting firms, was a victim of Anonymous after their private donations account was hacked, in which millions of dollars were stolen and redirected to various charities.

After PayPal cut services to Wikileaks in lieu of Julian Assange's arrest, Anonymous responded quickly by bringing down PayPal's servers, disrupting it's business and costing it millions.

After the introduction of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) by the U.S. government in 2011, Anonymous almost literally blew up the websites of the FBI, U.S. Department of Justice, Universal Music Group, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America and Warner Music Group, among others.

Figure 1 (Click to Enlarge)

It doesn't stop there- individual targets have been chosen as well.

Current ruler Bashar Al-Assad of Syria was one of many victims, as his personal e-mails were distributed publicly throughout the web.

The C.E.O. of HBGary Federal, another infamous security firm, was a victim after Anonymous hacked it's webpage and replaced the website's main image with a message of it's own (see Figure 1).

Their mission of defending freedom of speech and internet liberty has placed them on the red list of many countries around the world. Their tactics represent the necessary methods in which to combat those that seek to oppress such basic fundamental rights as free speech and peace. Through clever and ingenious ways, Anonymous has assembled some of the brightest minds around the world, albeit anonymously, to further the cause of social justice and freedom for all.

This truly global social movement is one that deserves much needed respect. For all of us little people out there the idea of battling these overwhelmingly powerful forces on our own seems futile. Even while peaceful protest and assembly have proven fruitful and effective, these forms of conscientious objection have also been met with oppression and censorship.

That's where Anonymous comes in. They do what we can't- strike at the heart of the oppressors. While we march around in the streets demanding rights, the powerful sit in their high rise buildings looking down upon us from their proverbial thrones made of money and influence. This has changed after Anonymous has penetrated the financial workings of these power mongers, making their actions more costly than profitable.

While our political mobility may be limited to influence legislators, Anonymous has the resources and expertise to carry out those goals of change and progress. We as individuals are just as much members of anonymous as anyone else, as our value as people and individuals have been thrown to the waste side in favor of those with the finances to bankroll new elections for corrupt politicians.

While these shadowy, influential and powerful entities are able to influence lawmakers to do their bidding, a similar, shadowy, influential, and powerful entity is one step ahead of them; Anonymous. The only difference is, the latter seek to defend the rights of the powerless, the voiceless, and the disenfranchised.

So next time you ask yourself "Who is Anonymous?", just remember; each and everyone of us is Anonymous.





Original post appeared in my blog, JtPolitik. Check out the site for other articles.

Sick of Obama and Romney? The Third Party Presidential Debate Shows Us Our Other Options

By John Amaruso 
Video found by Bryant Clark

While many of us complain that there aren't enough options in our two party dominated system, 3rd party candidates have done something to tackle that problem. Circumventing the Commission on Presidential Debates and the Federal Election Committee, the Free And Equal Elections Foundation (www.freeandequal.org) have hosted the Third Party Presidential Debate at the Hilton Chicago, the first of it's kind, hosted by Larry King.

The debate includes Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, Constitution Party candidate Virgil Goode, & Justice Party candidate Rocky Anderson.

Below is the video if you want to see what other options there are out there besides Coca-Cola and Pepsi. I heard MelloYello is delicious.

Man Arrested Stealing Dinosaur Fossils From Mongolia

 By John Amaruso

Like something out of a bad Nicholas Cage movie, a Florida man was arrested after allegedly smuggling dinosaur fossils through U.S. customs Wednesday. Among his rare fossils was an almost complete Tyrannosaurus Bataar skeleton.

The Tyrannosaurus Bataar skeleton was to be sold at an auction for $1.05 million dollars until it was revealed that the bones were in fact stolen from the Mongolian government.

Eric Prokopi, the man arrested for the crime, calls himself a "commercial Paleontologist" who buys and sells dinosaur fossils (I had no idea that job even existed). Nonetheless, Mr. Prokopi's theft of the ancient bones landed him various charges, including one count of conspiracy to smuggle illegal goods, another of possession of stolen property and making false statements to officers.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara was quoted as saying that they uncovered a "one-man black market in prehistoric fossils"

The fossil heist is the largest- and perhaps the only one of it's kind in history.

Dude, Where's My Democracy?

              This post originally appeared on my blog, JTpolitik, but since it remains a relevant and pressing issue in this year's election and future elections, I felt it appropriate to re hash this. For other articles, check out- www.jtpolitik.blogspot.com


By John Amaruso

             Does anyone see what is going on here? The fundamentals of our very democracy are eroding right in front of us. Slowly our basic human rights- access to our government, political mobility, our very essential right to vote is being taken away by the very forces that benefit off the suppression of the common person.

      Since Obama's election in 2008, conservatives, Republicans, special interest groups and corporations have done all they can in their power to assure another 'Washington outsider' (aka individual minded person) can never have the power to take away their power. Those who seek to exploit the many for the benefit of a few are threatened by the very idea of the people electing leaders who do not serve their interests.

      This is all being done in independent, but by no means unrelated means.

      For example, Governor Walker in Wisconsin's attempts to effectively strip Unions of their collective bargaining rights is an attempt to deconstruct the very fabric of the working class, limiting their ability to make an affordable wage. In turn leaving worker's helpless to decide their own economic fates

      This has lowered the standard of living for Union members and workers across the country. Once the wages for Union workers are lowered, the market responds appropriately. Private employers no longer have to compete with the fair wages Unions offer, thereafter they lower the wages of their own workers. This spiral down of wages decreases the livelihoods of millions around the country.

      This growing inequality in America has been rising rapidly to the point where political cynicism runs rampant. Due to this new economic form of enslavement, people feel powerless to affect change even in their own workplace, let alone their own government. It has disillusioned millions across the country, as their will to vote has been undermined by their perceived inability to compete with the economic powerhouses who currently control our system. 

      The necessity of economic power has become so essential in today's politics, it is disturbing. A dollar is the new vote and the value of that vote has been steadily rising.

      With the Citizens United decision, unlimited and undisclosed campaign donations can be made by corporations and even foreign entities. This in turn blurs out any chance of a common person effecting change from their elected leader, as now even the most well intentioned of officials have to compete with this wave of cash polluting the political arena and instead they ignore the needs of their community. It's hard to see the masses over that large pile of money on top of your desk.

      We now live in a system where two individuals, the Koch brothers, are legally allowed to donate over $400 million dollars to an election campaign. That's $400,000,000. That's more money than most of us could ever hope to see in our lives, yet is the price these power hungry fat cats are willing to pay to silence our voices in favor of theirs.

      These two scenarios combined are a vicious cycle. By lowering wages, workers have less to spend, meaning less economic mobility, meaning less time, less resources. Less purchasing power, less opportunity to compete with the wealthy who buy off our politicians. By permitting the exorbitant expenditures by corporations to politicians, we have effectively said "your vote is no longer valid, please pay for your ballot here".

      Meanwhile Voter ID restrictions are being passed in multiple states, disenfranchising lower income families. The only legal way to vote in some of these states is to present a valid driver's license. There are millions of people in this country who do not drive, let alone can even afford to buy a license. These potential voters are being suppressed, providing only more power for the wealthy to pick and choose their candidates.

      Overall this is an extremely troubling phenomenon. This increasing trend of concentrating wealth to the top, has in turn concentrated political power to the top. It is a frightening day when a man like Sheldon Adelson, a virtually unknown billionaire, is able to donate, by himself, $100 million dollars to a candidate. It feels like we are living in the early 20th century America, with Tammany Hall and the political machines that dominated American politics.

      It's come to a point where President Obama, who had denied funding from corporations in his 2008 campaign for President, has resorted to despicable means just to simply stay alive financially against his pro business opponent. President Obama has attended more fundraisers this year alone than President Bush did in his entire time in office.

      Since the Democratic Party has vowed to take the moral high ground and reject any private donations from corporations, the party has been reduced to begging for donations from the public. Even in such degrading and humiliating ways, like having to ask couples who are getting married to instead of asking their wedding guests for presents, re route that money as campaign donations to Obama's re-election staff.

      These factors have created a perfect storm. A decrease in income for all, an increase in political mobility for a few and restrictions in voting access for many has diluted our democracy to a government of the people, by the people, and for the people... who can afford it.

      This election has very serious consequences. It has underlying implications that can echo for generations. It's a choice to decide what kind of country we are. The choice between the powerful, the wealthy, the elite, and the choice between the people, the workers and the common man.

      This is what it has come down to. We must decide that enough is enough and we have to let our voices be heard, because if we don't our right to our voices will be taken away forever. We must let those in power know that what they are doing is wrong and that we can not accept it. A democracy is only as effective as it's people demand it to be. And for that, I say we demand much more.

There Are Other Options Than Obama or Romney... Do You Know About Them?

 By Kenny Brown

This Wednesday, October 3rd, we will be able to watch the first Presidential Debate of the Election season. President Obama and Mitt Romney will stand up in front of the country and try and make their case for their need to be the President for the next 4 years. Unbeknownst to many there will be something missing. That something, many say, will be the lack of balance and true democracy on the stage. Sure, both of the candidates from the two major parties will be up there for all to see and hear. Something many seem to forget is that there are not just two candidates in this election. Missing from the stage will be multiple other multiple candidates from other parties. Two of the more popular third party candidates, Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein will be missing from the conversation.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson

Clearly it would be hard for the debates to accommodate all potential Presidential candidates but the credentials for entrance into Presidential debates seems to be a little hard for any third party candidate to fulfill. A common credential needed is 15% in the national polls. While this seems like a simple thing for candidates to achieve if they are truly serious about a Presidential run, the problem seems to lie within how these candidates are able to get their names out there. If the mass media wishes for the candidates to enter the debates by a fair number of 15% they should cover the candidates fairly. How would an electorate fairly give candidates a chance in the polls if they do not know what they stand for or if they even exist?

When the likes of CNN, NBC News and Fox News blatantly ignore third party candidates they tweak the system to the advantage of the two major parties. They skew the poll results and some may say they do it because of their own bias towards specific major party candidates. NBC News is biased towards President Obama, Fox News is biased towards Gov. Mitt Romney, and CNN is biased towards absurd and unnecessary technology. All joking aside the problem could be considered a serious one.

Many write off third party candidates as schmucks just trying to detract from the issues at hand and waiting for their moment in the spotlight. But if one considers the potential change of conversation that can come from just one third party candidate taking part the consequences of not allowing them too could be monumental. People seem to forget that these other candidates can bring to the stage a differing point of view that many potential voters may actually share.

Green party candidate Jill Stein

It seems that the American electorate does not truly understand the great potential from a differing point of view. When you want medical advice you generally feel safer receiving it from many different people and points of view. So why should this not be the same for the outcome of the country and future legislation? If the citizens were allowed to hear answers from more than two candidates it is possible that they may realize their beliefs align more with candidates outside of the current two party system that dominates the stage.

It has been 20 years since a 3rd party candidate took part in the Presidential Debates. No matter if you support Obama or Romney, if you believe in a true democratic process, it would only seem necessary to widen the stage for more points of view. When you watch the debates on Wednesday just remember, you are not getting the full story. I suggest doing some research for yourself, I doubt you will regret it.



-If you want to check out either Gary Johnson or Jill Stein's website, click the links below-

www.garyjohnson2012.com

www.jillstein.org

Since When is Exposing a Crime, a Crime?

Apparently, exposing somebody else for committing a crime has been made illegal- especially when that somebody is the Pope.



By John Amaruso

The Pope's former butler, Paolo Gabriele is being put on trial for aggravated theft, and is being charged with stealing and "leaking sensitive information". The information stolen implicated the Vatican and the Pope on corruption charges. It's reported that over 82 cardboard boxes filled with material he had stolen over the years was confiscated from him.

Gabriele was arrested in May and shortly afterwards he admitted to not only stealing private documents, but also a check for 100,000 euros, a gold nugget and a 16th-century copy of Virgil's epic poem the Aeneid (Guardian).

Now while his means may have been illegal, the end may justify it- that is, if any action is ever taken over the documents that allege corruption against the Vatican and the Pope. I wouldn't hold your breath...


Sources- http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/sep/29/popes-butler-trial-video

It's That Time of Year: The Abortion Talk.

By Cara Cholewczynski

Election years... the period of time every four years where women’s issues come bubbling up to the surface to reveal their loathsome presence. I find it ironic that women are viewed as a special topic in this country, even though we outnumber men. We sit and watch as men debate what should be done with our rights and our bodies. We are grossly under represented in our legislative branch and we have never been represented in our executive branch. With election season in full swing, there is one hot button issue that everyone in this country has an opinion on one way or the other: the right for women to choose. The Republican Party has taken the viewpoint of shrinking government to be small enough to fit inside of our uteruses. In their defense though, their cold hearts would enjoy a nice, warm uterus.

Regardless, the ladies of this country are under fire. Our right to choose is under attack.

To begin, I am a firm believer in the quality of life triumphing life itself. If I am ever in the position where I can’t wipe my own ass, I can only hope that somebody would be ballsy enough to put a pillow over my head and end my misery. I also don’t doubt that many people would want the same. So why is it that pro-lifers would rather see a baby born than a baby fed, clothed, wanted, loved. To be quite frank, once a baby is born, pro-lifers could not give a damn about what happens to it. Many of these people are the same ones who want to cut assistance programs for those on limited budgets. They view pregnancy as a consequence for having premarital (or even marital) sex for enjoyment. They say that if you don’t want a baby you shouldn’t have sex. Well, nobody wants to get into a car accident, but we still drive. The pro-life movement isn’t pro-life at all, it’s pro-birth.

"Adoption!", they all cry as they do not understand the ramifications of throwing another child into the system. It is a convenient justification to impede on the rights of others. They do not realize that by replacing abortion with adoption they are still forcing a woman to carry a child she does not consent to carry. Pro-lifers like to claim that an abortion is going to harm you mentally for many years after the procedure. In all honesty, if anything is going to mess someone up it is going to be carrying a child in their stomach for nine months and then putting it up for adoption knowing that your child could be anywhere in the world, essentially hidden in plain sight. In addition, 61% of women who have abortions already have children in this world. It is safe to say that if these women had the means to keep the child they would, but for many reasons they can not. How would you explain that one? Even if someone chose to carry a pregnancy to term then give it up for adoption, did you know that every year more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care system without ever being adopted and more than 100,000 are stuck in foster care waiting to be adopted? There are thousands of children already stuck in this vicious cycle, so why would we want to add more? I would love to see pro-lifers put their money where their mouths are and adopt every single child that's left without parents before they tell women to put more in.

You know what’s worse than the manipulation and deception of vulnerable people? Crisis pregnancy centers. Wait, they’re the same thing. Their advertisements on buses and billboards offer help and information to those with an unplanned pregnancy, but only limit their options to the pro-life agenda. They are also the ones that push the idea of public assistance, and when it comes to hiding behind a voting booth curtain they shut it down. They do not give women their complete legal and medical options. They give misinformation and spout their lies for their own benefit. They paint a pretty picture of what life is like with a child that a woman can not afford. Deception and manipulation of those who are confused, scared, ashamed and looking for help is about the most deplorable thing a human being can do to another human being.

Pro-lifers want to see abortion come to an end, but do not want to support things that are designed to end them. Sex education, access to contraception, a safe environment to talk about these things. Teenagers are going to experiment with sex, end of story. So instead of putting their hands over their ears and shutting their eyes, pro-lifers should stop, look, and listen. Sex happens, so instead of ignoring it and teaching young adults that it is somehow inherently bad for you- let us educate those who didn’t have awesome sexual role models like my mother. Lets make access to contraception easy, lets teach young adults how to put a condom on rather than the idea that, “there is no condom for the heart”.

Lets do some math: Sex education + safer sex= less abortions and reduced STI rates. What a win/win concept! It had been proven time and time again that abstinence-only education fails young adults like myself. Education is the key to prevention.

There is a lot that can be said about this subject. Much of this article was handwritten as I pondered my own thoughts in freshman-level sociology that I have decided to take as a senior. Part II will be released when I find some time in the near future. Regardless... nuclear war? Bring it. Zombie apocalypse? Eh, I think I’ll be alright. Repealing of Roe v. Wade? I have just crapped my pants. I am a huge supporter of the right to choose, and I agree with Bill Clinton on his stance that abortion should be, “Safe, legal and rare”. I want to see the system being overhauled with contraception access for everyone and a real life sex education for all. Education is the only proven way to reduce abortions in this country. Nobody is pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice and will no longer be sitting silently as the pro-life movement uses its lies and one-sided thinking to scare people into having a child that they do not want.