Log in

View Full Version : Lost faith in anonymous


mogrann
Jun 5, 2014, 06:03 AM
I thought I had found a group that had the same beliefs as me. I thought I belonged and they wanted to achieve the same goals.
Last night and today in Moncton NB there is a shooter loose. He is armed and dangerous. 3 cops dead 2 cops injured. City on lockdown.
He belongs to anonymous and I went to the page. They agree with what he is doing and actively supporting him.
I am so disillusioned and guess I fit in no where. I have left all of my anon groups and guess I will go solo.
My beliefs you can change the world by being nice, protest and being knowledgeable about issues going on. Vote etc.
This post is not about gun laws by the way. I believe 100% if I can realize with my issues I should not have guns then others with mental health issues should be able to do the same. I am no rocket scientist, nothing special.
Today I worry for friends and family down home. Stay safe all. Sigh sad world it is becoming.

J_9
Jun 5, 2014, 06:05 AM
What is anonymous?

tomder55
Jun 5, 2014, 06:12 AM
I think they are the idiots that walk around in Guy Fawkes masks.
Anonymous (group) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group))

mogrann
Jun 5, 2014, 06:13 AM
Nods Tom... I believe a lot in what they believe but not the violence they are no advocating.

paraclete
Jun 5, 2014, 06:57 AM
Yes a take off of the film V, the idea is basicly vengence against a corrupt political system, I don't thing you have anything to worry about

NeedKarma
Jun 5, 2014, 07:04 AM
Hi mogrann,

We're not far from each other. We're struggling with this here as well. I have a couple of RCMP friends I need to check on.

tomder55
Jun 5, 2014, 08:01 AM
Nods Tom... I believe a lot in what they believe but not the violence they are no advocating.

From what I hear ,they are planning to do a hacker attack on the World Cup Games in Brazil .Their call for protests there has already lead to violence.

paraclete
Jun 6, 2014, 06:17 AM
They are opportunists Tom, they probably think wasting money on football stadums is a corrupt act. Given the record of FIFA they are probably right

mogrann
Jun 6, 2014, 06:50 AM
They have caught the guy.
When I became involved it was due to situations in Canada with the government, helping the homeless etc. I thought from what they told me they believed in peaceful demonstrations, trying to change the world for the better etc. Now I see with the situation in Moncton they are all about achieving their goals at any costs... effectively becoming as corrupt as some of the government is. I prefer my way as I am not hurting people or the planet.

NeedKarma
Jun 6, 2014, 07:46 AM
Now I see with the situation in Moncton they are all about achieving their goals at any costsI don't think you can attribute his actions to the group Anonymous. He is one disturbed fellow. Usually when Anon is involved in an action it is a group activity.

mogrann
Jun 6, 2014, 07:47 AM
NeedKarma I went to the anonymous page he belonged to on Facebook and they were supporting him.

smoothy
Jun 6, 2014, 07:54 AM
You don't even want to know what I think about that group... and the site censor settings wouldn't allow me to print it.


But in short... they are a bunch of blowhard hypocrites... doing exactly what they complain about others doing. Only they do it more often.

Its like Bullies complaining about being picked on by other bullies.

If any of them had real lives or jobs they wouldn't have time for these childish antics.

NeedKarma
Jun 6, 2014, 08:08 AM
I went to the anonymous page he belonged to on Facebook and they were supporting him.Ah, I see. That's terrible. I'm on your side about this.

mogrann
Jun 6, 2014, 08:09 AM
Sadly Smoothy I believe there are more people than me that believe in them thinking they are a peaceful group. Good people not realizing they are supporting a group that believes in achieving what they want at any cost. I guess I am gullible and stupid

smoothy
Jun 6, 2014, 08:15 AM
Sadly Smoothy I believe there are more people than me that believe in them thinking they are a peaceful group. Good people not realizing they are supporting a group that believes in achieving what they want at any cost. I guess I am gullible and stupid

I agree... a lot of these type groups prey on people who for whatever reason are susceptible to being influenced at a particular given moment... then their idocrination begins.

Don't beat yourself up over it... you saw them for who they are... that's saying something good about who you are... a lot of people when they get sucked in really start to beleave the stories and crap they are fed. You saw through it despite it all. That's more than a lot of others can say.

NeedKarma
Jun 6, 2014, 08:19 AM
Don't beat yourself up over it... you saw them for who they are... that's saying something good about who you are... a lot of people when they get sucked in really start to beleave the stories and crap they are fed. You saw through it despite it all. That's more than a lot of others can say.That sounds an awful lot like empathy. :-)

Wondergirl
Jun 6, 2014, 08:43 AM
That sounds an awful lot like empathy. :-)
Good call, NK!

smoothy
Jun 6, 2014, 08:50 AM
Well there isn't a lot of it... its not a well... more like a pothole after a rainstorm. So don't get too used to it.

Wondergirl
Jun 6, 2014, 09:05 AM
Well there isn't a lot of it... its not a well... more like a pothole after a rainstorm. So don't get too used to it.
Oh, c'mon. Admit it. There's a warm and fuzzy smoothy in there somewhere.

And mogrann, you did what you needed to do to quiet your mind and improve your life. Be proud of yourself!

ebaines
Jun 6, 2014, 10:28 AM
Oh, c'mon. Admit it. There's a warm and fuzzy smoothy in there somewhere.


I've always though smoothy was the "I say let 'em crash" guy from the movie "Airplane": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn0WdJx-Wkw

JK.

smoothy
Jun 6, 2014, 10:40 AM
Close ebaines... I think most adults need to learn their lessons the hard way... otherwise they won't really understand or respect the reasons unless they see it for themselves. You could have told them over and over... but until they go through it... they would have brushed you off with a well you don't see them like I do... or you just don't understand.

Its a rare person that actually TAKES advice when its given at face value....when its contrary to what they want to do.

Take a look at 99% of the posts on relationships... how many of these people who should run away screaming keep going back for more crap over and over again... and blow off any advice telling them to run not walk away.

Applies on a LOT of topics.

I had no empathy for the idiots at Jonestown... remember that cult? I think the human gene pool got just a little better after that.

Wondergirl
Jun 6, 2014, 10:44 AM
You can be empathetic and reflective in a "negative" way too -- "You really want to drink that kool-aid, do you?"' Empathy isn't sympathy.

mogrann
Jun 6, 2014, 10:55 AM
Smoothy you are a good person deep down. Thank you for what you said to me. I see it in your posts because you care. You can deny it but I see it. You shoot straight from the hip and are blunt but still care. If you did not care you would not comment on the threads you would say sucker mwhahahaha your own fault.
I am sure you don't blame everyone at Jonestown.. there were some innocents there (children). You and I are kind of similar in one aspect... black and white thinking. I still struggle with it. Everything is not all right or all wrong. Rules do not apply always when it comes to people. You need to look at situations.
For example Jonestown.
Everyone who drank the koolaid were idiots (black and white thinking)
People who drank the koolaid and knew what it was were idiots. (skillful)

smoothy
Jun 6, 2014, 11:18 AM
Being I'm an Engineer... I do tend to see things in absolutes... it either meets spec or it doesn't... there really isn't a lot of "well it depends" in my world.

If something isn't meeting it... there is always a reason... the reason must be identified... EG if there was a commercial power outage... thats acceptable. If if can't be positively identified... it has to be worked until it has been and the offending equipment repaired or replaced. There really isn't a grey area of "well its close enough".

The old analogy of "Close enough for government work" is a misnomer at least depending on your perspective. The Government is the toughest customer I've seen and has the highest standards at least from my perspective of providing a service to them. And those standards are part of every contract I've dealt with adn clearly defined. Conversely I've Personally seen clerks working the desk at several INS offices where I seriously wondered how they manage to dress themselves every day... also wondering if they got their job in a lottery or if their interviewer was under the influence of something rather strong at the time.

Catsmine
Jun 6, 2014, 01:36 PM
Those of us on the Libertarian end of politics quite often confuse Anonymous with the Occupy vandals, just as the TEA groups and the Religious Right seem to have almost the same membership. The down side to Anonymous seems to be their unwillingness to work within the system for change.

paraclete
Jun 7, 2014, 05:24 AM
he's an engineer, he thinks in absolutes, to borrow from Star Wars only a sith thinks in absolutes. I see it all now, it's a sith plot, so Obama as sith and you, are you the apprentice? spreading disinformation

tomder55
Jun 7, 2014, 06:18 AM
only a sith thinks in absolutes had to be the most ignorant quote in the whole Star Wars series. For one thing ;there was nothing more dogmatic in the series than the Jedi order. By making that statement (only a Sith deals in absolutes ) ,Obi is making an absolute statement .

When Windu took down Palpatine ;he decided that Palpatine did not deserve a trial . It was Anakin ,trying to do the right thing ,that prevented the summary execution . So apparently the black v white lines between the Sith and the Jedi could at times be shades of gray . Perhaps that is what Obi meant by that comment ?

talaniman
Jun 7, 2014, 06:43 AM
There are seldom absolutes that can apply to every situation as conditions and situations are often changing and big factors in the outcomes. Even an engineer accepts the same design that worked well in one situation won't work in another because of conditions, or situations. Then he must change his thinking and make adjustments for a good outcome.

Mogrann, I can appreciate your disappointment in finding out that which you had put such high hopes in didn't work as you wanted, and I hope your adjustments to this situation goes well. In time I think it will.

NeedKarma
Jun 7, 2014, 02:54 PM
Even an engineer accepts the same design that worked well in one situation won't work in another because of conditions, or situations. Then he must change his thinking and make adjustments for a good outcome. Yep, that's just applying scientific principles properly.

mogrann
Jun 7, 2014, 03:55 PM
Ironic that today was a day full of frustration due to my black and white thinking. RULES ARE MADE TO BE FOLLOWED. NO EXCEPTIONS. I was told when filling the front of the deli add 3 days to expiry dates that date is when we pull stuff. For example today is June 7 so nothing before June 10 is to be in the deli... Guess there is a grey line in that I got told today by one manager. Another manager told me differently. Gahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Just set rules and tell me keep them the same. NO grey areas for this lady. Too stressful

paraclete
Jun 7, 2014, 03:58 PM
had to be the most ignorant quote in the whole Star Wars series. For one thing ;there was nothing more dogmatic in the series than the Jedi order. By making that statement (only a Sith deals in absolutes ) ,Obi is making an absolute statement .

When Windu took down Palpatine ;he decided that Palpatine did not deserve a trial . It was Anakin ,trying to do the right thing ,that prevented the summary execution . So apparently the black v white lines between the Sith and the Jedi could at times be shades of gray . Perhaps that is what Obi meant by that comment ?

And you don't understand that Star Wars is mirror image of the world you live in. The seperatists, (capitalists) trying to drain the last drop of profit, the Jedi, a righteous judiciary, upholding the power of the empire, the sith, incidideous politics, playing both sides against each other, and Anakin, disaffected youth, obscessed with self, the clones, a mindless military, the blunt instrument of policy, the senate, a do nothing government, unable to enact anything useful

tomder55
Jun 7, 2014, 04:50 PM
the Jedi, a righteous judiciary, upholding the power of the empire

the Republic you mean . I stick by my comment .They are the most rigidly dogmatic group in the story .

smoothy
Jun 7, 2014, 06:40 PM
NK and Tal... its obvious neither of you are engineers if you make those statements.

Absolutes do exist... and exist in many, MANY situtations. The end requirements are an absolute... Specifications require X as a minimum. That is not up for negotiation... its an absolute... It has nothing to do with the means to get there, THe means used MUST meet that spec in he end... If its across town... or to the other side of the planet... that spec remains constant... its an absolute. Particularly when you deal with FCC specs... they are cast in stone... there is no fudge room. Sign papers that show it measures out of spec... its rejected and you are in trouble for releasing a product that fails to meet spec... lie and fake the numbers to show it meets spec.. you are in trouble... and also liable for possible legal action for falsifying federally required documentation. No GRAY area there... its a very hard limit.

I've seen very costly lawsuits resulting from someone thinking those specs and contracts were a suggestion and not a solid hard limit.

I saw Martin Marietta busted bigtime in 1987 (before the Lockheed merger) I saw a freind get fired for not fudging certifications under his supervisors direct orders.....I saw him sue the company and basically get a job for life (Federal court ordered him reinstated and basically fire proofed him as long as he showed up for work and didn't physically assault his boss)....and a settlement large enough his future retirement was fully funded when he was still in his mid 20's.

Had someone different try that with me not long after that.....I basically told them to get stuffed and I took it up with their boss and the CEO of the company both...they got fired that afternoon.

Catsmine
Jun 8, 2014, 02:24 AM
Star Wars is mirror image of the world you live in

As Saul Bellow wrote to Bruce McAllister in 1963 (in response to a question about whether readers find symbolism in his works that isn't there), "Symbol hunting is absurd."

NeedKarma
Jun 8, 2014, 03:09 AM
NK and Tal... its obvious neither of you are engineers if you make those statements.How little you know. And frankly I doubt the veracity of many of your stories.

talaniman
Jun 8, 2014, 04:20 AM
Then why are building codes varied from location to location? There may be constants, and standards but no absolutes. Designers may have to meet a minimum standard, but are allowed to exceed the minimum all the time, and we are not talking shortcut to maximize profits.

That may be done a lot but most endeavors have policy and procedure to adhere to developed over time and with much trial and error and regulated by law. But no absolutes.

Our debate is not about bridges though its about the written word specifically about how we interpret the Constitution and thats where I most disagree with your term absolute. Obviously if even a group of engineers can see things differently then so can citizens governed by that Constitution. Now you may have gotten an A for memorizing the words and should be commended for the effort, but that doesn't make your interpretation an absolute one at all, just your opinion, and the courts have ruled many of your absolutes to be false as while you can bear arms, government can set limits on the arms you can bear, and regulate whatever militia you form.

And McDonald's can regulate if you bear your arms in their establishment or NOT. Your absolute rights have limits.

cdad
Jun 8, 2014, 07:28 AM
When you open the door to debate and you keep moving the line then soon you have no line at all. The term a line in the sand is not open for debate and not a starting point. It is an end to a means. When you want to debate the Constitution you need to be very careful about the reinterpretation you create. You have only 2 choices. Freedom or infringement. Those that choose infringement are the ones that trade away freedom for a supposed security. They want to regulate everything. That is not what the Constitution is about. It is about creating a nation that remains free beyond the barriers of time. Words change all the time and new words enter into the language as well as old words changing in meaning. So it is up to all of us to determine which path we want to be on - Freedom or Infringement. It is a choice we are all given for now by the Constitution.

mogrann
Jun 8, 2014, 07:40 AM
I like your post cdad but remember this it is freedom from harm for all. I don't see that lately with the world (not just the US). We need to restrict people who should not have guns from getting them for example. Pretty simple you have mental health issues you don't get a gun. The news is now reporting the moncton shooter had his guns legally and also had mental health issues. THAT IS WRONG! Yes he can still get guns illegally but lets fix the system for getting them legally first then work on the illegal trade.
I will never own a gun or have one in my house due to my issues and because of that lately I don't feel safe. Isn't that sad that due to me being responsible and realizing guns can be dangerous for me (previous suicide attempts is my reasoning) I am at risk of being hurt if someone breaks into our house. Yes it is a real fear for me due to crimes in our area, neighbor being stabbed, and the way the world is going. I have Owen and I am sure he will try to protect me but I don't want him hurt either.

Catsmine
Jun 8, 2014, 08:14 AM
me being responsible

Aye, there's the rub. Those who would rule neglect the other side of Liberty: Responsibility. If I wish the freedom to swing my fist, I alone am responsible for ensuring it does not contact your nose (a lousy target, I could break a knuckle). The wannabe rulers claim various reasons to deny me that responsibility and therefore deny me that freedom. They buy into the Hippie culture notion that Liberty and Libertine are synonymous. I was a Flower Child; it took me many years to realize the difference, but I did grow up.

talaniman
Jun 8, 2014, 08:33 AM
Why do we limit ourselves to just two extremes when there are many choices and adjustments in the middle? That's what debate is about finding those choices that work. Is letting an undiagnosed loony buy a gun the price of freedom?

Is that the best we can do? I don't buy it at all. I think the core problem is people not trusting their duly elected officials or making them accountable to do the job we entrust them with. Some are more fearful than others and decisions and choices made in abject fear do not ensure good or fair outcomes. Is there no safe balance between the right to bear arms and a well regulated militia? One accountable to the people they serve and not just self serving unto itself?

Sorry but as a nation we have more and better choices that either or and two opposite extremes. Neither of which ensures, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or freedom. Just ask the victims of crime or a loony rampage.

Catsmine
Jun 8, 2014, 09:09 AM
people not trusting their duly elected officials or making them accountable to do the job we entrust them with.

The second part of that is where the failure has occurred.

cdad
Jun 8, 2014, 09:54 AM
Tal what you have to try to understand is the lines have been drawn in so many directions that it is time to reign them in. You can't have your cake and someone elses too. That is not how it works. First off I agree the mentally ill dont need to be carrying guns around. But one incidence doesnt create a track record. Also with the advent of the HIPPA laws caregivers are reluctent to pass information along without evidence. To gather evidence requires laws to be in place so procedure can be followed. You know this. I have posted before the many articles that have been written about the treatment of the mentally ill and how the pateints rights apply. We need to sort that out first. Sometimes there may be greater requirements without restrictions in place for ownership of firearms. That way your are not truely impinging on someones right to bear arms and at the same time protecting those rights that are already in place.

As far as trusting our politicians I think it goes a long way in saying that if our POTUS doesnt trust them Im sure most citizens have reason for not trusting them also.

cdad
Jun 8, 2014, 09:59 AM
I like your post cdad but remember this it is freedom from harm for all. I don't see that lately with the world (not just the US). We need to restrict people who should not have guns from getting them for example. Pretty simple you have mental health issues you don't get a gun. The news is now reporting the moncton shooter had his guns legally and also had mental health issues. THAT IS WRONG! Yes he can still get guns illegally but lets fix the system for getting them legally first then work on the illegal trade.
I will never own a gun or have one in my house due to my issues and because of that lately I don't feel safe. Isn't that sad that due to me being responsible and realizing guns can be dangerous for me (previous suicide attempts is my reasoning) I am at risk of being hurt if someone breaks into our house. Yes it is a real fear for me due to crimes in our area, neighbor being stabbed, and the way the world is going. I have Owen and I am sure he will try to protect me but I don't want him hurt either.


You still have options. Shooting someone is not an option for many people no matter how stable their mental state appears to be. I applaud you for knowing your limitations and respect those limits you have set for yourself. But I do have a suggestion. Have you thought about non leathal weapons ? There is no reason to cross the lethal boundries when you have the right game plan. They do make everything from pepper sprays to guns that shoot pepper balls. Not the best option around Owen. Also they make shotgun shells that fire bean bags. Another nonleathal option that can buy you time to get away and remove yourself from the situation. As you know in your feild of occupation training is always best to achieve your goal. Takeing self defense classes can keep you off the victim list and provide you with the level of comfort you require to feel safe no matter where you go.

talaniman
Jun 8, 2014, 10:05 AM
I won't acknowledge/concede that lines have been drawn or needs to be reigned in to further the debate, and we have many incidence of crazy people killing folks not just one and that looks to continue. All options are on the table, including reporting dangerous people, be they family, police, or a doctor.

cdad
Jun 8, 2014, 10:25 AM
Tal your missing the point here. If things are going to change then you first have to work with what you have and examine it for content. If you dont wish to do that then your only going to end up frustrated banging your head against the wall.

You can't expect doctors or mental health professionals to report anyone but the worst of the worst because their hands are tied. To change that will take an examination of the system that is applied to the individual. If you put the goal before the process then your going to force that outcome rather then building a solution that can work for everyone. Get the blinders off and start looking around at what you really want and how to achieve it for everyone rather then running with such a narrow focus that your not helping anyone.

talaniman
Jun 8, 2014, 10:39 AM
Some states report mentally dangerous people to a central data base, and some don't and that's already happening, so its not with blinders on that I made that suggestion CD, just trying to expand the conversation beyond the right to bear arms.

How the violent mentally ill can buy guns - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/30/health/mental-illness-guns/index.html)


Federal law (http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t17t20+540+0++%28%29%20 %20AND%20%28%2818%29%20ADJ%20USC%29%3ACITE%20AND%2 0%28USC%20w%2F10%20%28922%29%29%3ACITE) makes it illegal to sell or give a firearm to anyone who "has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution."
Federally licensed gun shops must use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics). Private sellers and gun shows have no background check requirement.
But information in the NICS is incomplete, particularly where mental health records are concerned, investigations found. That's because of what some of the system's critics call a huge legal loophole in the background check laws that put "guns in the hands of killers," according to a study conducted by a group of mayors.
The system is only as good as the data. And "the data is the real problem," said Mark Glaze, the director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns (http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr039-11.shtml), an organization whose recent in-depth study found millions of mental health records were missing from the federal background check system.
"It's an unsatisfying answer, since people always want to blame the soft federal laws or blame the gun lobby," he said. "But if you have ever worked around a state legislature, they'll tell you there is no money and no time to improve this kind of reporting.

cdad
Jun 8, 2014, 10:53 AM
Here is the rest of the story:
BACKGROUND
Since 1968, federal law has banned gun sales or transfers to, among others, anyone adjudicated as “a mental defective” or committed to a mental institution (18 USC § 922(d)(4) & 27 CFR § 478.11). Since 1993, it has required (1) states to report people prohibited from acquiring or possessing firearms to the NICS database and (2) federal firearm licensees (gun dealers), before completing firearm transfers, to check the database to determine if prospective purchasers are disqualified from receiving firearms under state or federal law. But a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court ruling effectively made state participation in NICS voluntary. In Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898 (1997) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZS.html)), the court ruled as unconstitutional, under the 10th Amendment, federal attempts to compel states to contribute to a federal regulatory program, absent funding.
Citing mostly privacy concerns and, in some cases, state laws that prohibit sharing of mental health data, more than half the states have declined to provide, or provide only limited, mental health data to the NICS database, according to a 1997 FBI press release. California, Colorado, Utah, and Virginia are among the states that currently require the reporting of such data to a state database, the NICS database, or both. Illinois also will require the reports, beginning June 1, 2008.


GUN LAWS AND MENTAL HEALTH REPORTS TO STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES (http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0188.htm)

Catsmine
Jun 8, 2014, 11:06 AM
California, Colorado, Utah, and Virginia are among the states that currently require the reporting of such data to a state database, the NICS database, or both

It is interesting to note that of those states mentioned, only one permits concealed carrying of firearms on school grounds and only one has never had a school shooting. How strange that both are the same state.